NAIPR Message

PI/19 allocations to multihomed ISPs was Re: pagans...

I am not commenting on the quality of the ARIN board of trustees but on
the organic process involved.  I strongly object to the way ARIN's board
is annointed.  It is not chosen by the members but by NSI.  That
annointed board then appoints the advisory council from which new BoT
members will come in the future.  This is not my idea of democracy. 
Immediate change in this structure should be non-negotiable, in my
opinion. If immediate change to some representational form of governance
does not occur, there are all kinds of avenues to pursue.  We need to
start discussing them.

Thus, I believe that Jim's point should not be dismissed out of hand. 
Are there any other thoughts down this line?  Frankly, I think we should
be exploring several alternatives simultaneously in case ARIN can not be
reformed.  

Eric Weisberg, Gen. Counsel
Internet Texoma, Inc.
The ISP which DIDN'T

Jim Fleming wrote:
> 
> On Tuesday, July 08, 1997 6:18 PM, Justin W. Newton[SMTP:justin at priori.net] wrote:
> @
> @ The ISP/C currently has no interest of becoming a registry.  We do intend
> @ to be involved in helping the registries form their policies, as well as
> @ representing the ISP community to the registries, but have no interest in
> @ performing the role ourselves.
> @
> @ Justin "Speaking for the ISP/C" Newton
> @
> 
> That is too bad....maybe some other ISP-oriented organization
> will realize the importance of this role...
> 
> --
> Jim Fleming
> Unir Corporation