[ARIN-consult] ARIN Community Consultation on the ICG RFP Response Process
jcurran at arin.net
Thu Oct 2 12:12:57 EDT 2014
On Oct 2, 2014, at 12:01 PM, Andrew Dul <andrew.dul at quark.net> wrote:
> On 10/1/2014 8:35 AM, ARIN wrote:
>> 2. Do we need a dedicated mailing list in the ARIN region for conducting
>> the community discussion on this topic, or does an existing ARIN list
>> such as arin-consult, arin-discuss, or PPML suffice? If a new list is
>> created for this purpose, should it be prepopulated with subscribers
>> from another list?
> I would suggest not using PPML, but other existing lists (such as
> -discuss or -consult) could be appropriate. I'm not opposed to a new
> separate list for this discussion. We have also discussed if a global
> list is more appropriate rather than another RIR specific list.
Not PPML - acknowledged. Do you have preference between -discuss
(which is members-only), -consult, or a new list for this purpose?
Also, are you recommending creation of a global list for this purpose,
or use of an existing global list? If so, which one? Would use of such
a list be instead of using an arin list, or in addition to?
> Could ARIN describe how it intends to publicize the survey to ensure
> that the feedback gathered represents a significant portion of the
> Internet community which is interested in participating in this process?
Announcing to arin-announce, followed by forwarding to PPML and NANOG
Would you recommend another approach?
> While I understand the desire to limit the number of questions on a
> survey to improve response rate. Having multi-bullet statements about
> which one might agree/disagree with different parts doesn't seem like
> the best way to approach getting feedback from the community. I'd
> suggest that perhaps each bullet deserves the ability to respond
> What type of scale or answer set is being proposed here? Yes/No? Or a
> range strongly disagree to strongly agree? With or without a neutral
> center response?
Is another format preferable? Should a "no opinion" option be included?
>> Survey Question 3 –Does this community feel that it has no position, per
>> se, on ICANN accountability mechanisms (other than the principle that
>> DNS community must be satisfied with that process before any IANA
> This seems like a somewhat leading question with lots of assumptions. I
> think this community would have a very different opinion on
> accountability mechanisms if the mechanisms chosen by the DNS community
> did not satisfy the concerns of the numbering community.
Do you recommend dropping this question, or prefer different phrasing?
> The survey should include an open text box (not related to any question)
> to allow those who choose to complete the survey to provide free-form
Acknowledged. We will add a question 4 (Do you have any other
comments or feedback) with free-form text reply field.
Excellent feedback - Thanks!
President and CEO
More information about the ARIN-consult