From steve at ibctech.ca Fri Jun 5 20:00:18 2009 From: steve at ibctech.ca (Steve Bertrand) Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 20:00:18 -0400 Subject: [arin-discuss] Co-ordination with other RIRs Message-ID: <4A29B192.7080109@ibctech.ca> I recently joined a couple of lists over @RIPE to monitor a specific thread in one of their working groups. After following these lists for the last few days, it almost seems as that we (ARIN) are trying to fight the same battles as they are. It didn't take me long to realize that many of the members on the PPML are also over there, so that got me thinking... Is there any consideration ever put into what the 'other guys' are doing when policy is created? More importantly, are there any global discussions that take place, so that one area can benefit from the experience of the other RIRs? Steve -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3233 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From jcurran at arin.net Fri Jun 5 21:55:36 2009 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 21:55:36 -0400 Subject: [arin-discuss] Co-ordination with other RIRs In-Reply-To: <4A29B192.7080109@ibctech.ca> References: <4A29B192.7080109@ibctech.ca> Message-ID: <08FDC16D-05B3-416E-B737-5C77D5F37ADB@arin.net> On Jun 5, 2009, at 8:00 PM, Steve Bertrand wrote: > ... > > After following these lists for the last few days, it almost seems as > that we (ARIN) are trying to fight the same battles as they are. > > It didn't take me long to realize that many of the members on the PPML > are also over there, so that got me thinking... > > Is there any consideration ever put into what the 'other guys' are > doing > when policy is created? More importantly, are there any global > discussions that take place, so that one area can benefit from the > experience of the other RIRs? Steve - Excellent question... short answer is "Yes". Both the ARIN Advisory Council and ARIN Board note developments in the other regions with respect to new policy initiatives. In fact, this is one of the major reasons why we make certain to have an AC member present at each RIR meeting (to bring back important issues and discussions for all of the AC members to consider). When policy proposals are presented at ARIN's public policy meeting, we make sure to mention any similar policy proposals underway in other regions for similar reasons. Finally, the staff actively engages with the staff of the other RIR's to be aware of policy discussions as the happen, and can also make the ARIN AC aware of any discussions which might prove relevant. Overall, there's a high level of awareness. We intentionally don't run single global discussions on policy, because it would be rather unwieldy but also because there are often local issues that need to be considered. This means that folks who wish to follow *all* of the various discussions for any given topic do need to get used to tracking each region's discussion, but you can often just track one RIR discussion and the most significant discussion points will be raised in any case. /John John Curran Acting President and CEO ARIN From steve at ibctech.ca Thu Jun 11 00:25:23 2009 From: steve at ibctech.ca (Steve Bertrand) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:25:23 -0400 Subject: [arin-discuss] (non) Ability to follow the PPML Message-ID: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> Being a relatively young person in this Internet world, and the roles I hold at the small organization I work for, I would formally like to say that I can not keep up with the pace of the PPML, and therefore can not properly make *informed* decisions on current policy matters. It is very disconcerting to me that I am just not political nor available enough to deal with the current issues at hand. Recently, I received a reply from Mr. Herrin, and regretfully, I don't even know how to reply to his message, as I don't have the time to think about how I really feel about it. (I'm honoured that I received a response from such a prolific and honourable member of our community though). I have so many things to say, but feel that there is no where to say them. I have many gripes, but can't complain... Informally: Are there any other ARIN members out there who are overwhelmed by the politics and shit that happen on the PPML and just can't keep up? Am I in a closet where I'm the only baby v4 holder listening? I'm sure there are other small(er) orgs out there (I'm but a /21 and /32 holder) who can feel my pain of either not wanting to deal with the politics individually, or are not able to deal with the politics individually. I'd like to know whether it would be worth-while trying to configure a group of 'small' participants who can discuss issues off-list based on what is on-list, and then react as a voice of many after aggregating the understanding of each other. Discussion and off-list feedback requested. Aside from my rant, I'd also like to personally thank John Curran who replied to my last -discuss message with a very informative, timely and understandable response. It was just pure irony that Mr. Vixie's email slipped through at about that same time that solidified your response to me ;) Steve -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3233 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From Daniel_Alexander at Cable.Comcast.com Thu Jun 11 12:03:57 2009 From: Daniel_Alexander at Cable.Comcast.com (Alexander, Daniel) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:03:57 -0400 Subject: [arin-discuss] (non) Ability to follow the PPML In-Reply-To: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> References: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> Message-ID: <997BC128AE961E4A8B880CD7442D94800C16E100@NJCHLEXCMB01.cable.comcast.com> Steve, You are not alone in your thoughts below. Many people feel that way, and it is also a topic of conversation within the ARIN AC. One thing I would offer is that you do have the Advisory Council at your disposal. You should feel free to contact any one of us off list if you have questions about the topics being discussed. Most people on these lists all have day jobs, and keeping up with the mailing lists can be a challenge. Thanks, Dan Alexander ARIN AC -----Original Message----- From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Steve Bertrand Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 12:25 AM To: arin-discuss at arin.net Subject: [arin-discuss] (non) Ability to follow the PPML Being a relatively young person in this Internet world, and the roles I hold at the small organization I work for, I would formally like to say that I can not keep up with the pace of the PPML, and therefore can not properly make *informed* decisions on current policy matters. It is very disconcerting to me that I am just not political nor available enough to deal with the current issues at hand. Recently, I received a reply from Mr. Herrin, and regretfully, I don't even know how to reply to his message, as I don't have the time to think about how I really feel about it. (I'm honoured that I received a response from such a prolific and honourable member of our community though). I have so many things to say, but feel that there is no where to say them. I have many gripes, but can't complain... Informally: Are there any other ARIN members out there who are overwhelmed by the politics and shit that happen on the PPML and just can't keep up? Am I in a closet where I'm the only baby v4 holder listening? I'm sure there are other small(er) orgs out there (I'm but a /21 and /32 holder) who can feel my pain of either not wanting to deal with the politics individually, or are not able to deal with the politics individually. I'd like to know whether it would be worth-while trying to configure a group of 'small' participants who can discuss issues off-list based on what is on-list, and then react as a voice of many after aggregating the understanding of each other. Discussion and off-list feedback requested. Aside from my rant, I'd also like to personally thank John Curran who replied to my last -discuss message with a very informative, timely and understandable response. It was just pure irony that Mr. Vixie's email slipped through at about that same time that solidified your response to me ;) Steve From igoldste at mum.neric.org Thu Jun 11 13:01:06 2009 From: igoldste at mum.neric.org (Ira Goldstein) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:01:06 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [arin-discuss] (non) Ability to follow the PPML In-Reply-To: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> References: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> Message-ID: Steve -- I am glad that you have sent out your note. I had e-mailed ARIN directly with the following, but have not yet heard back from them. Do you think that something like this would help? Take care. Ira Goldstein (IG2-ARIN) >>> Ira Goldstein 6/1/2009 1:17 PM >>> Back on March 30th, as the POC for NET NERIC I received a confirmation to subscribe to the ARIN-PPML. The message gave the reason for subscribing as "You and your organization need to be aware of the policy proposals that are being discussed. If a proposal becomes policy, it could affect the way you do business with ARIN, with Internet service providers, or with your customers." Even though I already subscribed to the ARIN-announce and ARIN-discuss lists, I accepted the request and have tried to keep up with the threads. One of your posts (and for the life of me I can't find it right now) from the IPv6 discussion, when someone did not realize that this was a language cleanup of a policy that will soon go into effect, asked how ARIN could do a better job of informing people of changes. I have the following observations and suggestions. 1) Increase the size that triggerst the PPML digests. Even though I have PPML set for Digest, there are days that I receive 10 or more "Issues" of the digest. This is way too many "daily" digests. Now I realize that with mailman you set a size limit to trigger extra digests, but with 30K as the trigger, you can wind up with as few as 3 messages in the digest (as was the case for ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 47, Issue 81). The reason for setting a list up for digest (at least for me) is to be able to periodically review the discussions without having the e-mails disrupt my day. 2) Clarify how ARIN-PPML differs from ARIN-discuss. 3) Enable members to receive just the announcements. In addition to posting the notices from info at arin.net on ARIN-PPML, cross-post it to ARIN-announce. Right now, only some of the notices are appearing on ARIN-announce (e.g., [arin-ppml] 2009-2 and 2009-4 Abandoned and [arin-ppml] 2009-3 and 2008-3 to remain on AC.s docket from May 4th are among many that were not on ARIN-announce). Once all sides are heard from, post a summary of the discussion (yup, more work for staff) on both PPML and announce. What this would do would allow members to carefully monitor proposals and decisions on the announcement list, participate or ignore the ensuing discussion on PPML, and if it is one that is ignored, still receive a summary of the pro-cons. Right now, I find myself digging through many e-mails in ARIN-PPML just to find the member services announcements. Thanks for the chance to vent. Sincerly, Ira Goldstein (IG2-ARIN) -------------- next part -------------- Being a relatively young person in this Internet world, and the roles I hold at the small organization I work for, I would formally like to say that I can not keep up with the pace of the PPML, and therefore can not properly make *informed* decisions on current policy matters. It is very disconcerting to me that I am just not political nor available enough to deal with the current issues at hand. Recently, I received a reply from Mr. Herrin, and regretfully, I don't even know how to reply to his message, as I don't have the time to think about how I really feel about it. (I'm honoured that I received a response from such a prolific and honourable member of our community though). I have so many things to say, but feel that there is no where to say them. I have many gripes, but can't complain... Informally: Are there any other ARIN members out there who are overwhelmed by the politics and shit that happen on the PPML and just can't keep up? Am I in a closet where I'm the only baby v4 holder listening? I'm sure there are other small(er) orgs out there (I'm but a /21 and /32 holder) who can feel my pain of either not wanting to deal with the politics individually, or are not able to deal with the politics individually. I'd like to know whether it would be worth-while trying to configure a group of 'small' participants who can discuss issues off-list based on what is on-list, and then react as a voice of many after aggregating the understanding of each other. Discussion and off-list feedback requested. Aside from my rant, I'd also like to personally thank John Curran who replied to my last -discuss message with a very informative, timely and understandable response. It was just pure irony that Mr. Vixie's email slipped through at about that same time that solidified your response to me ;) Steve -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3233 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ ARIN-Discuss You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. From michael.dillon at bt.com Thu Jun 11 14:51:50 2009 From: michael.dillon at bt.com (michael.dillon at bt.com) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 19:51:50 +0100 Subject: [arin-discuss] (non) Ability to follow the PPML In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <28E139F46D45AF49A31950F88C497458019BA191@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net> > 1) Increase the size that triggerst the PPML digests. Note that if you only want to periodically review the mailing lists, not follow every word, you can do this by going here Select the desired archive and choose Date for the sort order. Also, if you login using the password from ARIN's monthly reminder message, there is an option where you can check to disable email delivery. That way you are still subscribed even though you receive no email. This means that you can still post messages to the list. --Michael Dillon From ipgoddess.arin at gmail.com Thu Jun 11 17:52:49 2009 From: ipgoddess.arin at gmail.com (Stacy Hughes) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:52:49 -0700 Subject: [arin-discuss] (non) Ability to follow the PPML In-Reply-To: <997BC128AE961E4A8B880CD7442D94800C16E100@NJCHLEXCMB01.cable.comcast.com> References: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> <997BC128AE961E4A8B880CD7442D94800C16E100@NJCHLEXCMB01.cable.comcast.com> Message-ID: <24c86a5f0906111452y6829867du5c6ff79a88a6b938@mail.gmail.com> Steve and All The Frustrated People,I feel your pain. I can barely keep track of the analogies, let alone support of policies! I would like to chime in with Dan here. You all elected us, and we are here to help you and do our best for the community. Please feel free to contact us if you need clarification or to express your support or opposition of a policy. I thank you for participating. More than that, I thank you for caring enough to take the time for thoughtful responses. Please don't give up! Stacy On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Alexander, Daniel < Daniel_Alexander at cable.comcast.com> wrote: > Steve, > > You are not alone in your thoughts below. Many people feel that way, and > it is also a topic of conversation within the ARIN AC. > > One thing I would offer is that you do have the Advisory Council at your > disposal. You should feel free to contact any one of us off list if you > have questions about the topics being discussed. > > Most people on these lists all have day jobs, and keeping up with the > mailing lists can be a challenge. > > Thanks, > Dan Alexander > ARIN AC > > > -----Original Message----- > From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net > [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Steve Bertrand > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 12:25 AM > To: arin-discuss at arin.net > Subject: [arin-discuss] (non) Ability to follow the PPML > > > Being a relatively young person in this Internet world, and the roles I > hold at the small organization I work for, I would formally like to say > that I can not keep up with the pace of the PPML, and therefore can not > properly make *informed* decisions on current policy matters. > > It is very disconcerting to me that I am just not political nor > available enough to deal with the current issues at hand. > > Recently, I received a reply from Mr. Herrin, and regretfully, I don't > even know how to reply to his message, as I don't have the time to think > about how I really feel about it. (I'm honoured that I received a > response from such a prolific and honourable member of our community > though). > > I have so many things to say, but feel that there is no where to say > them. I have many gripes, but can't complain... > > Informally: > > Are there any other ARIN members out there who are overwhelmed by the > politics and shit that happen on the PPML and just can't keep up? Am I > in a closet where I'm the only baby v4 holder listening? > > I'm sure there are other small(er) orgs out there (I'm but a /21 and /32 > holder) who can feel my pain of either not wanting to deal with the > politics individually, or are not able to deal with the politics > individually. > > I'd like to know whether it would be worth-while trying to configure a > group of 'small' participants who can discuss issues off-list based on > what is on-list, and then react as a voice of many after aggregating the > understanding of each other. > > Discussion and off-list feedback requested. > > Aside from my rant, I'd also like to personally thank John Curran who > replied to my last -discuss message with a very informative, timely and > understandable response. It was just pure irony that Mr. Vixie's email > slipped through at about that same time that solidified your response to > me ;) > > Steve > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Discuss > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tedm at ipinc.net Thu Jun 11 19:18:49 2009 From: tedm at ipinc.net (Ted Mittelstaedt) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 16:18:49 -0700 Subject: [arin-discuss] (non) Ability to follow the PPML In-Reply-To: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> References: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> Message-ID: <4A3190D9.4060802@ipinc.net> Steve Bertrand wrote: > > Are there any other ARIN members out there who are overwhelmed by the > politics and shit that happen on the PPML and just can't keep up? I just don't bother reading or participating or paying attention to the topics on the list that are of no interest to me or my org. Such as "Large hole in IPv6 assignment logic" I haven't even been reading those. Threaded e-mail is a wonderful thing. Ted From bsmith at cctwireless.com Thu Jun 11 20:21:45 2009 From: bsmith at cctwireless.com (Berton) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:21:45 +0000 Subject: [arin-discuss] (non) Ability to follow the PPML In-Reply-To: <24c86a5f0906111452y6829867du5c6ff79a88a6b938@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> <997BC128AE961E4A8B880CD7442D94800C16E100@NJCHLEXCMB01.cable.comcast.com><24c86a5f0906111452y6829867du5c6ff79a88a6b938@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <798329951-1244769855-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-314912201-@bxe1102.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> Cool stacy but he is working to keep up like me, but please continue to keep us informed. Suggestion, send the whole policies out for reading cause some of us are mobile a lot. Sent from my BlackBerry? wireless device from Cable & Wireless bMobile -----Original Message----- From: Stacy Hughes Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:52:49 To: Alexander, Daniel Cc: Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] (non) Ability to follow the PPML _______________________________________________ ARIN-Discuss You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. From steve at ibctech.ca Fri Jun 12 23:18:19 2009 From: steve at ibctech.ca (Steve Bertrand) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:18:19 -0400 Subject: [arin-discuss] (non) Ability to follow the PPML In-Reply-To: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> References: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> Message-ID: <4A331A7B.4010400@ibctech.ca> Steve Bertrand wrote: [...snip...] > Are there any other ARIN members out there who are overwhelmed by the > politics and shit that happen on the PPML and just can't keep up? I must reply to my own post. I've received a tremendous amount of feedback (some on-list, and the vast majority off-list) regarding this thread I started. What I originally wrote seemed to spark a lot of emotions across the board. Along with wanting to make a couple of points, I'd like to let everyone who replied privately know that I will respond individually to you over the next week. My post had me find that: - the members within the AC really do care, and without question, will take the time to respond to questions/concerns, no matter how small or insignificant they seem - there are many other members out there who are also small ops/engineers (in the sense of IPv4 holdings size) - there are many other members out there who have a very difficult time following policy discussion on the PPML, and moreover, feel that their input might not be welcome, as it could be inserted untimely into a thread - there are current AC members who are actively managing "small" networks, which provides (me with) a feeling of understanding - the majority of the people who replied to me expressed how they personally try to deal with the number of posts to the PPML using different technical techniques, signifying (to me) that a portion of the members on the list can't keep up - some have stated that there needs to be an aggregation tactic in place, that will consolidate the important points from the list regarding policy discussion I really care about the future of global IP communication. If the numbering resource hierarchy falls apart, I feel that everything I have learnt up until now was a waste. One thing I've gained from my post (so far), is that I need to do more research on the policy proceedings, why the meetings are important, and how the PPML feedback is counted when it comes to decision-making. I live to learn (and I suppose I learn to live); I want to learn more about how to better engineer the network, as much as I want to learn how to help with responsible policy for the next generation who operates our network if it still operates over IP. Steve -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3233 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From spiffnolee at yahoo.com Sat Jun 13 08:50:31 2009 From: spiffnolee at yahoo.com (Lee Howard) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 05:50:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [arin-discuss] process and description of meetings (was: (non)ability to follow PPML) In-Reply-To: <4A331A7B.4010400@ibctech.ca> References: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> <4A331A7B.4010400@ibctech.ca> Message-ID: <31362.72774.qm@web63301.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Steve Bertrand wrote: > My post had me find that: (I started to delete your findings, but they're too good. Your notes are consistent with my opinions of ARIN community, members, and AC) > - the members within the AC really do care, and without question, will > take the time to respond to questions/concerns, no matter how small or > insignificant they seem > > - there are many other members out there who are also small > ops/engineers (in the sense of IPv4 holdings size) > > - there are many other members out there who have a very difficult time > following policy discussion on the PPML, and moreover, feel that their > input might not be welcome, as it could be inserted untimely into a thread I personally try to thank every new contributor to the list. I sometimes skip people who are already active contributors at IETF or NANOG, or people who start out with an aggressive tone. > - there are current AC members who are actively managing "small" > networks, which provides (me with) a feeling of understanding > > - the majority of the people who replied to me expressed how they > personally try to deal with the number of posts to the PPML using > different technical techniques, signifying (to me) that a portion of the > members on the list can't keep up > > - some have stated that there needs to be an aggregation tactic in > place, that will consolidate the important points from the list > regarding policy discussion I would worry about the filters of the person aggregating the posts. But maybe we can do better. > I really care about the future of global IP communication. If the > numbering resource hierarchy falls apart, I feel that everything I have > learnt up until now was a waste. > > One thing I've gained from my post (so far), is that I need to do more > research on the policy proceedings, why the meetings are important, and > how the PPML feedback is counted when it comes to decision-making. I can get more specific on this. Warning: long, detailed description follows. As you've seen, many of the members of the Advisory Council are active on PPML. All of them read it. So every post affects their thinking. Usually, a small subcommittee of 2-3 AC members will shepherd a proposal through the process, making edits based on comments, until the AC believes it has reached a stable state. Then the AC votes on the proposal, and if passed it becomes a Draft Policy. Policy Development Process: https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html Handy flowchart: https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp_appendix_a.pdf The Draft Policy is the text that goes to the public policy meetings. Alternating with other informative presentations, every Draft is presented to the people present (including remote participants), beginning with a history of the proposal, including a summary of the debate so far. For instance, for proposal 2009-4 presented in San Antonio, we learned that 18 people had made 58 posts, of whom 3 were in favor, and 4 were against it (the rest apparently weren't clear about their positions). Three sample statements were presented to show some of the debate to date. https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_XXIII/pdf/monday/2009-4_intro.pdf After that 2-minute presentation, someone will present the text of the proposal, to remind everyone what we're discussing. Then the floor is open for discussion, and people walk up to microphones. The Chair indicates who is next in line to speak, and people say their piece. Other people get up to respond. It's sometimes passionate, but always respectful. To describe the scene, there are rows of tables where people can plug in their laptops. There are two large screens for projecting slides. Some subset of Board and AC site facing the participants from a dais/rostrum, so you can see who they are. The presenter stands at a podium/lectern with a mike so you can hear them. There are rows between tables, with six microphones on stands, so everyone can get to a mike fairly easily. There's usually a show of hands to get a sense of the room. The AC meets after the meeting, and discusses each Draft Policy. Staff provides every AC member with a summary similar to what was presented at the meeting, but including hand count. If there's a discrepancy between support on the mailing list and support in the room, there's a long debate; this is rare. The AC then votes, and if approved, it goes to Last Call on PPML to see if we missed anything. Then the Board looks at it, makes a final determination that the policy poses no risk to the organization, and adopts it (or sends it back to the AC for revision). Detailed notes, transcripts, presentation slides, and even video of the last meeting are available from here: https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_XXIII/ppm.html I hope that gives everyone a sense of how PPML matters, and why meeting participation matters, too. Also, the meetings are fun, with great conversation at breaks and meals, and a great social event. People are approachable, but you often don't need to approach anyone--if you say something at the mike, or if you've been active on the list, people will seek you out. You're very likely to find an AC member, Board member, and staff member at your lunch table. Sorry about the long post. Need coffee. But maybe I should repost this every six months, so people get an idea of how and why to participate, and why to come to meetings, and especially what to expect. Lee From michael.dillon at bt.com Sat Jun 13 15:40:54 2009 From: michael.dillon at bt.com (michael.dillon at bt.com) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 20:40:54 +0100 Subject: [arin-discuss] (non) Ability to follow the PPML In-Reply-To: <4A331A7B.4010400@ibctech.ca> Message-ID: <28E139F46D45AF49A31950F88C49745801A2115B@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net> > - there are many other members out there who have a very > difficult time following policy discussion on the PPML, and > moreover, feel that their input might not be welcome, as it > could be inserted untimely into a thread These people should post regardless of what other on the list might think or do. Your opinions count, literally, since the AC counts the people who post for or against each proposal. > - some have stated that there needs to be an aggregation > tactic in place, that will consolidate the important points > from the list regarding policy discussion In the real world, that is called a newspaper, or an editorial. It helps give people a sense of what is going on, but is often used to manipulate opinions. Better to just read what you can, follow what you think is important, and don't worry about reading every darn thing on the list. I skim lots of posts, i.e. I do not read every word. > I really care about the future of global IP communication. If > the numbering resource hierarchy falls apart, I feel that > everything I have learnt up until now was a waste. And if a comet hits the earth then your whole life was a waste. You can only do what you can do. Carve off some chunk of life that you can be responsible for, and don't worry so much about the rest. With 5 billion people around, there are plenty of others to take up the slack. > I live to learn (and I suppose I learn to live); I want to > learn more about how to better engineer the network, as much > as I want to learn how to help with responsible policy for > the next generation who operates our network if it still > operates over IP. Look up the word "polymath". It's a lifestyle that suits some people, but most of us are better off specializing. --Michael Dillon From tedm at ipinc.net Mon Jun 15 13:20:01 2009 From: tedm at ipinc.net (Ted Mittelstaedt) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 10:20:01 -0700 Subject: [arin-discuss] process and description of meetings In-Reply-To: <31362.72774.qm@web63301.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> <4A331A7B.4010400@ibctech.ca> <31362.72774.qm@web63301.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4A3682C1.7060004@ipinc.net> Lee Howard wrote: > The Draft Policy is the text that goes to the public policy meetings. > Alternating with other informative presentations, every > Draft is presented to the people present (including remote participants), > beginning with a history of the proposal, including a summary of the > debate so far. For instance, for proposal 2009-4 presented in San > Antonio, we learned that 18 people had made 58 posts, of whom > 3 were in favor, and 4 were against it (the rest apparently weren't > clear about their positions). But, Lee, this is EXACTLY how it works In Real Life, ie: in real government. Take the US Congress for example. At most congressional sessions, half the representatives and senators aren't present during the debates, aren't contributing, aren't even paying much attention. Why? Because whatever is up for debate isn't of interest to them. PPML has a number of topics that come up and not every one of them is of general interest. For example an org may not have native IPv6 connectivity and may have plenty of IPv4 and therefore may take the pragmatic approach that they are just going to ignore IPv6 for a few more years and let others figure the problems out. By contrast an org may have both IPv6/IPv4 and plenty of IPv4 and may decide that the issues of IPv4-sales, or IPv4-runout are entirely uninteresting. It is not necessary for every member of PPML to weigh in on every issue that is discussed here. Sure they can if they want, but if members feel an issue doesn't apply to them - why is it necessary for them to post? Your making, I think, a rather insulting assumption that the people who don't post about a topic are failing to post because they are unclear, or confused, or have trouble following it. Sure, some people are probably in that camp. I would submit if they spent more time following the list and researching some of the posts they don't understand that they would come up to speed pretty quickly. Of course, some people out there refuse to spend anything more than the absolute minimum of time on anything that someone isn't handing them cash to spend time on - I pity these people as that attitude destroys the richness of life, but that's their choice, (and I'm sure they are a lot of the complainers since they want stuff spoon fed) - but I feel that at least as many people simply don't weigh in on issues that they feel don't affect them. We would get worse policy if a LOT of uninformed people were putting in their opinions, than if FEWER INFORMED people were putting in their opinions. If the latter is happening now, we are doing pretty good. And, a year from now some of those in the "I'm clueless" camp will have moved into the "I'm clueful" camp, and some in the "I'm clueful" camp will have moved into the "I'm clueless" camp. That's just how life works. After all, the US Constitutional Convention back in 1787 had SEVENTY appointed delegates, of which only 55 attended but only 42 of them actually stayed to complete the US Constitution, and only 39 of those actually signed it. In other words, only 55% of the people selected to write the US Constitution actually ended up signing it - and only 3 people who DIDN'T sign the US Constitution, actually went on record declining to sing it (Gov. Randolph & G. Mason of VA and E. Gerry of MA) And that's the US Constitution!!!!!!!! Ted From scottleibrand at gmail.com Mon Jun 15 13:32:25 2009 From: scottleibrand at gmail.com (Scott Leibrand) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 10:32:25 -0700 Subject: [arin-discuss] process and description of meetings In-Reply-To: <4A3682C1.7060004@ipinc.net> References: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> <4A331A7B.4010400@ibctech.ca> <31362.72774.qm@web63301.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <4A3682C1.7060004@ipinc.net> Message-ID: <4A3685A9.4010503@gmail.com> Ted, I don't think Lee was implying that everyone should post on every topic. Rather, he seems to be commenting on the fact that that every time staff puts up the summary of PPML comments, only about 10-15% of them clearly expressed support for or opposition to a proposal. The rest are discussing details, or for whatever other reason aren't clearly in support of or opposition to the proposal more generally. -Scott Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > Lee Howard wrote: > >> The Draft Policy is the text that goes to the public policy >> meetings. Alternating with other informative presentations, every >> Draft is presented to the people present (including remote >> participants), >> beginning with a history of the proposal, including a summary of the >> debate so far. For instance, for proposal 2009-4 presented in San >> Antonio, we learned that 18 people had made 58 posts, of whom 3 were >> in favor, and 4 were against it (the rest apparently weren't >> clear about their positions). > > But, Lee, this is EXACTLY how it works In Real Life, ie: in real > government. > > Take the US Congress for example. At most congressional sessions, > half the representatives and senators aren't present during the debates, > aren't contributing, aren't even paying much attention. Why? Because > whatever is up for debate isn't of interest to them. > > PPML has a number of topics that come up and not every one of them is > of general interest. > > For example an org may not have native IPv6 connectivity and may have > plenty of IPv4 and therefore may take the pragmatic approach that they > are just going to ignore IPv6 for a few more years and let others figure > the problems out. > > By contrast an org may have both IPv6/IPv4 and plenty of IPv4 and may > decide that the issues of IPv4-sales, or IPv4-runout are entirely > uninteresting. > > It is not necessary for every member of PPML to weigh in on every issue > that is discussed here. Sure they can if they want, but if members feel > an issue doesn't apply to them - why is it necessary for them to post? > > Your making, I think, a rather insulting assumption that the people who > don't post about a topic are failing to post because they are unclear, > or confused, or have trouble following it. > > Sure, some people are probably in that camp. I would submit if they > spent more time following the list and researching some of the posts > they don't understand that they would come up to speed pretty quickly. > Of course, some people out there refuse to spend anything more than the > absolute minimum of time on anything that someone isn't handing them > cash to spend time on - I pity these people as that attitude destroys > the richness of life, but that's their choice, (and I'm sure they are > a lot of the complainers since they want stuff spoon fed) - but I feel > that at least as many people simply don't weigh in on issues that they > feel don't affect them. > > We would get worse policy if a LOT of uninformed people were putting > in their opinions, than if FEWER INFORMED people were putting in their > opinions. If the latter is happening now, we are doing pretty good. > > And, a year from now some of those in the "I'm clueless" camp will > have moved into the "I'm clueful" camp, and some in the "I'm clueful" > camp will have moved into the "I'm clueless" camp. That's just how > life works. > > After all, the US Constitutional Convention back in 1787 had SEVENTY > appointed delegates, of which only 55 attended but only 42 of them > actually stayed to complete the US Constitution, and only 39 of those > actually signed it. In other words, only 55% of the people selected > to write the US Constitution actually ended up signing it - and only > 3 people who DIDN'T sign the US Constitution, actually went on record > declining to sing it (Gov. Randolph & G. Mason of VA and E. Gerry of MA) > > And that's the US Constitution!!!!!!!! > > Ted > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Discuss > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. From spiffnolee at yahoo.com Mon Jun 15 14:56:57 2009 From: spiffnolee at yahoo.com (Lee Howard) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:56:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [arin-discuss] process and description of meetings In-Reply-To: <4A3682C1.7060004@ipinc.net> References: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> <4A331A7B.4010400@ibctech.ca> <31362.72774.qm@web63301.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <4A3682C1.7060004@ipinc.net> Message-ID: <289651.64517.qm@web63301.mail.re1.yahoo.com> ----- Original Message ---- > From: Ted Mittelstaedt > To: Lee Howard > Cc: Steve Bertrand ; arin-discuss at arin.net > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:20:01 PM > Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] process and description of meetings > > Lee Howard wrote: > > > The Draft Policy is the text that goes to the public policy meetings. > Alternating with other informative presentations, every > > Draft is presented to the people present (including remote participants), > > beginning with a history of the proposal, including a summary of the debate so > far. For instance, for proposal 2009-4 presented in San > > Antonio, we learned that 18 people had made 58 posts, of whom 3 were in favor, > and 4 were against it (the rest apparently weren't > > clear about their positions). > > But, Lee, this is EXACTLY how it works In Real Life, ie: in real > government. "The rest weren't clear [in their posts] about their positions." Clarification added. .. . . > Your making, I think, a rather insulting assumption that the people who > don't post about a topic are failing to post because they are unclear, > or confused, or have trouble following it. No, the point was that we couldn't tell from their posts what their position was. Lee From tedm at ipinc.net Mon Jun 15 16:58:05 2009 From: tedm at ipinc.net (Ted Mittelstaedt) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:58:05 -0700 Subject: [arin-discuss] process and description of meetings In-Reply-To: <289651.64517.qm@web63301.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <4A308733.2060905@ibctech.ca> <4A331A7B.4010400@ibctech.ca> <31362.72774.qm@web63301.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <4A3682C1.7060004@ipinc.net> <289651.64517.qm@web63301.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4A36B5DD.2030108@ipinc.net> Lee Howard wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- >> From: Ted Mittelstaedt >> To: Lee Howard >> Cc: Steve Bertrand ; arin-discuss at arin.net >> Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:20:01 PM >> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] process and description of meetings >> >> Lee Howard wrote: >> >>> The Draft Policy is the text that goes to the public policy meetings. >> Alternating with other informative presentations, every >>> Draft is presented to the people present (including remote participants), >>> beginning with a history of the proposal, including a summary of the debate so >> far. For instance, for proposal 2009-4 presented in San >>> Antonio, we learned that 18 people had made 58 posts, of whom 3 were in favor, >> and 4 were against it (the rest apparently weren't >>> clear about their positions). >> But, Lee, this is EXACTLY how it works In Real Life, ie: in real >> government. > > "The rest weren't clear [in their posts] about their positions." > Clarification added. > > .. . . >> Your making, I think, a rather insulting assumption that the people who >> don't post about a topic are failing to post because they are unclear, >> or confused, or have trouble following it. > > No, the point was that we couldn't tell from their posts what their > position was. > Why do they have to have a position? It is perfectly possible to argue a position yet not take it yourself. My wife makes me do that every time she picks out a pair of shoes in the store!!! ;-) Ted From jmaimon at chl.com Mon Jun 22 20:38:08 2009 From: jmaimon at chl.com (Joe Maimon) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:38:08 -0400 Subject: [arin-discuss] Global policy Message-ID: <4A4023F0.1000100@chl.com> How does one introduce a global (IANA) policy? From jcurran at arin.net Mon Jun 22 20:48:38 2009 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:48:38 -0400 Subject: [arin-discuss] Global policy In-Reply-To: <4A4023F0.1000100@chl.com> References: <4A4023F0.1000100@chl.com> Message-ID: <151FAC12-A275-4A1E-B676-E3453368CE40@arin.net> On Jun 22, 2009, at 8:38 PM, Joe Maimon wrote: > > How does one introduce a global (IANA) policy? Introduce the draft language into the policy process process for the RIR in each region, and then coordinate as necessary. This is sometimes easier to accomplish if you focus on one region at first, but make it clear that the intention is for it to be a global policy. You'll inevitably be asked if you intend to introduce it yourself or would like assistance with the other regions. If this doesn't happen, please contact any member of the AC or myself and we'll figure how to facilitate. /John John Curran Acting President and CEO ARIN From scottleibrand at gmail.com Mon Jun 22 20:45:01 2009 From: scottleibrand at gmail.com (Scott Leibrand) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:45:01 -0700 Subject: [arin-discuss] Global policy In-Reply-To: <4A4023F0.1000100@chl.com> References: <4A4023F0.1000100@chl.com> Message-ID: <4A40258D.20606@gmail.com> Just submit it to ARIN through the normal process, and make clear that it's to be a global policy. Then someone (you, or others) will have to submit it in the other 4 RIRs as well. -Scott Joe Maimon wrote: > How does one introduce a global (IANA) policy? > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-Discuss > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.