[ARIN-consult] ARIN Community Consultation on the ICG RFP Response Process

Hannigan, Martin marty at akamai.com
Thu Oct 2 19:42:45 EDT 2014

This is a trade association that ARIN claims represents its members. I do believe -discuss is appropriate since the general public has plenty of outlets to participate in on their own. They can be easily pointed towards one. 

This issue has little to do with ARIN public policy. If we're going to pay for it and allow our names to be aggregated as "the commujity", we ought to have some privilege. 




> On Oct 2, 2014, at 18:36, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> 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.
> The problem with -discuss is that it has a limited subscriber base (-discuss
> is limited to ARIN members). -consult strikes me as being equally inappropriate
> to PPML and I think a dedicated list for this purpose is more appropriate.
> The availability and subscription instructions should be sent to -discuss, -consult,
> and -ppml, but that should be sufficient.
>>> === Draft ICG Response Survey Questions:
>>> Survey Question 1 – Do you agree that the following are the primary
>>> priorities for the ARIN community?
>>> • There should be minimal operational change – the current processes for
>>> IANA operation and related policy-making are effective and allow for the
>>> participation of all interested parties.
>>> • Any new oversight mechanism should incorporate and build on the
>>> existing RIR community, policy-making processes.
>>> • The RIR communities are ultimately accountable for the management of
>>> those IANA functions relating to management of the global Internet
>>> number resource pools, and this should be reflected in any new oversight
>>> mechanisms.
>>> Survey Question 2 – Do you agree that a model for IANA oversight
>>> endorsed by the ARIN community should include the following elements?
>>> • ICANN has historically managed operation of the IANA functions well,
>>> and should continue to do so at this time.
>>> • The IANA functions operator must be answerable and accountable to the
>>> communities that it serves. The number resource community is represented
>>> in such accountability processes by the membership-based Regional
>>> Internet Registry organizations.
>>> • Funding arrangements to cover the staff, equipment and other
>>> operational costs associated with operation of the IANA functions should
>>> be transparent and stable.
>>> • Efforts should be made to maintain the IANA functions as a “bundle”,
>>> managed by a single operator.
>>> • This does not necessarily imply a single, central point of oversight
>>> authority – any oversight mechanism should reflect the legitimate
>>> authority of different communities for specific functions as they relate
>>> to number resources, domain names and protocol parameters.
>> 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
>> independently.
> +1 to this… Multipart questions on a survey are almost always frustrating to me
> as I almost always find myself wondering how on earth I can possibly express
> which pieces I agree or disagree with.
>> 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?
> Count this as a vote for the latter (scale, including a neutral center).
>>> 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
>>> transition)
>> 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.
> Indeed, though my gut answer to the question as posed is “Absolutely NOT!”
> We definitely have a role and a position.
>> 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
>> feedback.
> +1
> Owen
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Consult
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing
> List (ARIN-consult at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services
> Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-consult mailing list