From info at arin.net Thu Oct 28 16:47:26 2021 From: info at arin.net (ARIN) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 16:47:26 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultat?= =?utf-8?q?ion_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= Message-ID: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 12 November 2021. Regards, John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mike at iptrading.com Thu Oct 28 17:05:59 2021 From: mike at iptrading.com (Mike Burns) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:05:59 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership_St?= =?utf-8?q?ructure?= In-Reply-To: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> Message-ID: <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? Regards, Mike From: ARIN-announce On Behalf Of ARIN Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM To: arin-announce at arin.net Subject: [arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 12 November 2021. Regards, John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rlaager at wiktel.com Thu Oct 28 17:15:21 2021 From: rlaager at wiktel.com (Richard Laager) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 16:15:21 -0500 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> Message-ID: <88b7f593-d6db-87f3-269c-f62bfaa16349@wiktel.com> Typos: 3a is missing a space after "members-only" 3c is missing "discussions" (I assume) after "members-only". If I'm understanding correctly, the change is to go from 2% of General Members to MIN(2% of General Members, 100). How many General Members are there? Without knowing what 2% of General Members is, it's hard to put the 100 minimum in context. -- Richard -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul at arin.net Thu Oct 28 17:19:45 2021 From: paul at arin.net (Paul Andersen - ARIN) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:19:45 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <88b7f593-d6db-87f3-269c-f62bfaa16349@wiktel.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <88b7f593-d6db-87f3-269c-f62bfaa16349@wiktel.com> Message-ID: <6D245ABE-ACC1-4DA1-87ED-04BCC5AE8ABB@arin.net> Richard, It is hard to predict future actions since the membership will fluctuate based on engagement in the process. Looking at the last election: https://www.arin.net/announcements/20201103_election/ There were 603 Member Orgs who voted for the BoT, 595 who voted for the AC. I?d make an educated guess that there is high overlap between the two. But a larger pool of potential members will come with the End Users who will be eligible to become members but it is hard to know how many will want to be engaged. Nor can we tell whether a mandate to vote to stay a member may engage more members. P. > On Oct 28, 2021, at 5:15 PM, Richard Laager wrote: > > If I'm understanding correctly, the change is to go from 2% of General Members to MIN(2% of General Members, 100). How many General Members are there? Without knowing what 2% of General Members is, it's hard to put the 100 minimum in context. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rlaager at wiktel.com Thu Oct 28 17:24:52 2021 From: rlaager at wiktel.com (Richard Laager) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 16:24:52 -0500 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <6D245ABE-ACC1-4DA1-87ED-04BCC5AE8ABB@arin.net> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <88b7f593-d6db-87f3-269c-f62bfaa16349@wiktel.com> <6D245ABE-ACC1-4DA1-87ED-04BCC5AE8ABB@arin.net> Message-ID: <0038e3c1-cf66-dae6-a55f-963bbdceb462@wiktel.com> On 10/28/21 4:19 PM, Paul Andersen - ARIN wrote: > > There were 603 Member Orgs who voted for the BoT, 595 who voted for > the AC. I?d make an educated guess that there is high overlap between > the two. But a larger pool of potential members will come with the End > Users who will be eligible to become members but it is hard to know > how many will want to be engaged. Nor can we tell whether a mandate to > vote to stay a member may engage more members. So the nomination-by-petition threshold is being raised from 2% of ~600 = 10 to 100. That's quite a big jump. What's the rationale for this? Separately, what's the rationale for requiring active voting to maintain voting rights? -- Richard -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul at arin.net Thu Oct 28 17:33:19 2021 From: paul at arin.net (Paul Andersen - ARIN) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:33:19 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> Message-ID: Mike, As noted we are not looking to get into individual NomCom feedback until the current process has come closer to conclusion; however, as you are tying it to this consolation I think it is important to raise that we don?t see Petitions as ?Black Eyes? or a complete failure of the system. If they were occurring every year that would be one thing - but one use of the petition process in two decades speaks to the success of ARIN?s governance. That is not to say there has not been much useful feedback and suggestions learned from this cycle and as mentioned - they will be considered in due time. The current threshold was well over 100 and both candidates were successful. P. > On Oct 28, 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns wrote: > > I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? > > Regards, > Mike > > > From: ARIN-announce > On Behalf Of ARIN > Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM > To: arin-announce at arin.net > Subject: [arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure > > The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. > > With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. > > The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. > > General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. > > Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf? > You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ > This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. > > Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net . You can subscribe to this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult . > > Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 12 November 2021. > > Regards, > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: > https://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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jcurran at arin.net Thu Oct 28 17:38:09 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 21:38:09 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> Message-ID: <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> Mike - To be clear, the most recent petition process had a threshold of 124 members (based on 2% of the 6183 eligible general members at election cutoff) ? the proposed bylaw language would have had no effect since it simply sets a minimum of 100 for such a process. The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest floor was a reasonable precaution. While we?re making it possible for more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote in ARIN?s elections.) Due to this uncertainty of the long-term general member count, it appeared prudent to provide a minimum for this petition requirement even if never needed. I hope this helps clarify the reasoning behind the proposed text ? there was no intent to ?make petitions harder? and it would be non-operative language if participation levels continue at present levels. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns > wrote: I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? Regards, Mike From: ARIN-announce > On Behalf Of ARIN Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM To: arin-announce at arin.net Subject: [arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 12 November 2021. Regards, John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) _______________________________________________ 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: https://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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul at arin.net Thu Oct 28 17:42:07 2021 From: paul at arin.net (Paul Andersen - ARIN) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:42:07 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <0038e3c1-cf66-dae6-a55f-963bbdceb462@wiktel.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <88b7f593-d6db-87f3-269c-f62bfaa16349@wiktel.com> <6D245ABE-ACC1-4DA1-87ED-04BCC5AE8ABB@arin.net> <0038e3c1-cf66-dae6-a55f-963bbdceb462@wiktel.com> Message-ID: <21E41B77-ED82-40E3-B059-3B07AFE354A2@arin.net> > On Oct 28, 2021, at 5:24 PM, Richard Laager wrote: > > On 10/28/21 4:19 PM, Paul Andersen - ARIN wrote: >> >> There were 603 Member Orgs who voted for the BoT, 595 who voted for the AC. I?d make an educated guess that there is high overlap between the two. But a larger pool of potential members will come with the End Users who will be eligible to become members but it is hard to know how many will want to be engaged. Nor can we tell whether a mandate to vote to stay a member may engage more members. > So the nomination-by-petition threshold is being raised from 2% of ~600 = 10 to 100. That's quite a big jump. What's the rationale for this > The number of voting members isn?t expected to drop since we?ve had a pretty steady count the past five years. 2020 - 603 2019 - 545 2018 - 660 2017 - 491 2016 - 583 And I think we can safely assume a noticeable increase from end users given many are engaged on the lists and now have the ability to become members. But an obvious side effect of this proposal is there will be a drop at some point when those who have chosen not to stay as an engaged member drop off which throws off the percentages. I don?t think the thresholds in reality will be hard to achieve but welcome the feedback. > Separately, what's the rationale for requiring active voting to maintain voting rights? > There are organizations who come to ARIN (sometimes frequently, sometimes once in a blue moon) and just want to use ARIN services and do not wish to be general members and this change allows that. For those that do choose to become members we are asking them to show their commitment to some degree of engagement. This was seen as a simple to track method; however, I think we?d very much welcome suggestions that are not burdensome on the organization to track. -p -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mike at iptrading.com Thu Oct 28 18:07:00 2021 From: mike at iptrading.com (Mike Burns) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:07:00 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> Message-ID: <17cc8f12844.f64dd07c2692577.2629917434903115563@iptrading.com> Hi Paul, I am commenting on the Bylaw changes just presented in the appropriate forum. Did I do something wrong by "tying it to the consultation"? Why impose a minimum, what is the reasoning behind this change? I see two successful petitions as black eyes because the petition system is a fail-safe mechanism for NomCom overreach. The NomCom in this case prevented the membership from voting for two qualified candidates, and that is the opposite of what the NomCom is for. Clearly the NomCom failed in this case, as I believe it failed in rejecting my candidacy for the AC. It doesn't have to occur every year, the evidence is right before us, and the larger issue is not what happened, but the risk the current NomCom setup presents to maintaining stakeholder governance. Yet this proposed change actually accentuates NomCom power! Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:33:19 -0400 Paul Andersen - ARIN wrote ---- Mike, As noted we are not looking to get into individual NomCom feedback until the current process has come closer to conclusion; however, as you are tying it to this consolation I think it is important to raise that we don?t see Petitions as ?Black Eyes? or a complete failure of the system. If they were occurring every year that would be one thing - but one use of the petition process in two decades speaks to the success of ARIN?s governance. That is not to say there has not been much useful feedback and suggestions learned from this cycle and as mentioned - they will be considered in due time. The current threshold was well over 100 and both candidates were successful.? P. On Oct 28, 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns wrote: I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? ? Regards, Mike ? ? From:?ARIN-announce ?On Behalf Of?ARIN Sent:?Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM To:?mailto:arin-announce at arin.net Subject:?[arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure ? The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at:?http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net?will close on 12 November 2021. ? Regards, ? John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ? ? ? ? _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (mailto:ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult?Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at?mailto:info at arin.net?if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul at arin.net Thu Oct 28 18:33:27 2021 From: paul at arin.net (Paul Andersen - ARIN) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:33:27 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <17cc8f12844.f64dd07c2692577.2629917434903115563@iptrading.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <17cc8f12844.f64dd07c2692577.2629917434903115563@iptrading.com> Message-ID: <12D518AB-A5E7-4204-8C16-A70AFC4DF1E9@arin.net> Mike, The current threshold is 124. The threshold there suggests it lowers to 100. There will be as many ? if not many more ? engaged general members. Where is it being raised? P. > On Oct 28, 2021, at 6:07 PM, Mike Burns wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > I am commenting on the Bylaw changes just presented in the appropriate forum. > Did I do something wrong by "tying it to the consultation"? > > Why impose a minimum, what is the reasoning behind this change? > > I see two successful petitions as black eyes because the petition system is a fail-safe mechanism for NomCom overreach. > The NomCom in this case prevented the membership from voting for two qualified candidates, and that is the opposite of what the NomCom is for. > Clearly the NomCom failed in this case, as I believe it failed in rejecting my candidacy for the AC. > > It doesn't have to occur every year, the evidence is right before us, and the larger issue is not what happened, but the risk the current NomCom setup presents to maintaining stakeholder governance. Yet this proposed change actually accentuates NomCom power! > > Regards, > Mike > > > > > > ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:33:19 -0400 Paul Andersen - ARIN wrote ---- > > Mike, > > As noted we are not looking to get into individual NomCom feedback until the current process has come closer to conclusion; however, as you are tying it to this consolation I think it is important to raise that we don?t see Petitions as ?Black Eyes? or a complete failure of the system. If they were occurring every year that would be one thing - but one use of the petition process in two decades speaks to the success of ARIN?s governance. That is not to say there has not been much useful feedback and suggestions learned from this cycle and as mentioned - they will be considered in due time. > > The current threshold was well over 100 and both candidates were successful. > > P. > > > On Oct 28, 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns > wrote: > > I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? > > Regards, > Mike > > > From: ARIN-announce > On Behalf Of ARIN > Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM > To: arin-announce at arin.net > Subject: [arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure > > The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. > > With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. > > The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. > > General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. > > Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf? > You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ > This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. > > Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net . You can subscribe to this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult . > > Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 12 November 2021. > > Regards, > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: > https://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. > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mike at iptrading.com Thu Oct 28 18:39:12 2021 From: mike at iptrading.com (Mike Burns) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:39:12 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_Re=3A___=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP?= =?utf-8?q?_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membe?= =?utf-8?q?rship_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <17cc90e102c.f9abae0c2695813.2919977162159749608@iptrading.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <17cc8f12844.f64dd07c2692577.2629917434903115563@iptrading.com> <12D518AB-A5E7-4204-8C16-A70AFC4DF1E9@arin.net> <17cc90e102c.f9abae0c2695813.2919977162159749608@iptrading.com> Message-ID: <17cc90ea58c.eb98a7b12695868.6472915106654099704@iptrading.com> Hi Paul, It imposes a minimum of 100, that minimum didn't exist before. "The President of ARIN shall provide the membership with at least seven (7) calendar days to receive the expression of intent to petition, and another fourteen (14) calendar days to receive the necessary signatures. The number of signatures required for petition nominations shall be at least two percent (2%) of, but no less than one hundred (100), e" Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:33:27 -0400 Paul Andersen - ARIN wrote ---- Mike, The current threshold is 124. The threshold there suggests it lowers to 100. There will be as many ? ?if not many more ? engaged general members.? Where is it being raised? P. On Oct 28, 2021, at 6:07 PM, Mike Burns wrote: Hi Paul, I am commenting on the Bylaw changes just presented in the appropriate forum. Did I do something wrong by "tying it to the consultation"? Why impose a minimum, what is the reasoning behind this change? I see two successful petitions as black eyes because the petition system is a fail-safe mechanism for NomCom overreach. The NomCom in this case prevented the membership from voting for two qualified candidates, and that is the opposite of what the NomCom is for. Clearly the NomCom failed in this case, as I believe it failed in rejecting my candidacy for the AC. It doesn't have to occur every year, the evidence is right before us, and the larger issue is not what happened, but the risk the current NomCom setup presents to maintaining stakeholder governance. Yet this proposed change actually accentuates NomCom power! Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:33:19 -0400 Paul Andersen - ARIN wrote ---- Mike, As noted we are not looking to get into individual NomCom feedback until the current process has come closer to conclusion; however, as you are tying it to this consolation I think it is important to raise that we don?t see Petitions as ?Black Eyes? or a complete failure of the system. If they were occurring every year that would be one thing - but one use of the petition process in two decades speaks to the success of ARIN?s governance. That is not to say there has not been much useful feedback and suggestions learned from this cycle and as mentioned - they will be considered in due time. The current threshold was well over 100 and both candidates were successful.? P. On Oct 28, 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns wrote: I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? ? Regards, Mike ? ? From:?ARIN-announce ?On Behalf Of?ARIN Sent:?Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM To:?mailto:arin-announce at arin.net Subject:?[arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure ? The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at:?http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net?will close on 12 November 2021. ? Regards, ? John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ? ? ? ? _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (mailto:ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult?Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at?mailto:info at arin.net?if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mike at iptrading.com Thu Oct 28 18:42:09 2021 From: mike at iptrading.com (Mike Burns) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:42:09 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_Re=3A___=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP?= =?utf-8?q?_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membe?= =?utf-8?q?rship_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <17cc90e102c.f9abae0c2695813.2919977162159749608@iptrading.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <17cc8f12844.f64dd07c2692577.2629917434903115563@iptrading.com> <12D518AB-A5E7-4204-8C16-A70AFC4DF1E9@arin.net> <17cc90e102c.f9abae0c2695813.2919977162159749608@iptrading.com> Message-ID: <17cc91159ad.1191e85702696104.8310298327137189665@iptrading.com> Hi Paul, By my reading, it imposes a minimum of 100, that minimum didn't exist before. "The President of ARIN shall provide the membership with at least seven (7) calendar days to receive the expression of intent to petition, and another fourteen (14) calendar days to receive the necessary signatures. The number of signatures required for petition nominations shall be at least two percent (2%) of, but no less than one hundred (100)" Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:33:27 -0400 Paul Andersen - ARIN wrote ---- Mike, The current threshold is 124. The threshold there suggests it lowers to 100. There will be as many ? ?if not many more ? engaged general members.? Where is it being raised? P. On Oct 28, 2021, at 6:07 PM, Mike Burns wrote: Hi Paul, I am commenting on the Bylaw changes just presented in the appropriate forum. Did I do something wrong by "tying it to the consultation"? Why impose a minimum, what is the reasoning behind this change? I see two successful petitions as black eyes because the petition system is a fail-safe mechanism for NomCom overreach. The NomCom in this case prevented the membership from voting for two qualified candidates, and that is the opposite of what the NomCom is for. Clearly the NomCom failed in this case, as I believe it failed in rejecting my candidacy for the AC. It doesn't have to occur every year, the evidence is right before us, and the larger issue is not what happened, but the risk the current NomCom setup presents to maintaining stakeholder governance. Yet this proposed change actually accentuates NomCom power! Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:33:19 -0400 Paul Andersen - ARIN wrote ---- Mike, As noted we are not looking to get into individual NomCom feedback until the current process has come closer to conclusion; however, as you are tying it to this consolation I think it is important to raise that we don?t see Petitions as ?Black Eyes? or a complete failure of the system. If they were occurring every year that would be one thing - but one use of the petition process in two decades speaks to the success of ARIN?s governance. That is not to say there has not been much useful feedback and suggestions learned from this cycle and as mentioned - they will be considered in due time. The current threshold was well over 100 and both candidates were successful.? P. On Oct 28, 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns wrote: I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? ? Regards, Mike ? ? From:?ARIN-announce ?On Behalf Of?ARIN Sent:?Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM To:?mailto:arin-announce at arin.net Subject:?[arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure ? The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at:?http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net?will close on 12 November 2021. ? Regards, ? John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ? ? ? ? _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (mailto:ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult?Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at?mailto:info at arin.net?if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mike at iptrading.com Thu Oct 28 18:46:29 2021 From: mike at iptrading.com (Mike Burns) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:46:29 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?b?Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7W2Fy?= =?utf-8?q?in-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_AR?= =?utf-8?q?IN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> Message-ID: <17cc9154e6a.fad3d13a2696504.7893291223603333780@iptrading.com> Hi John, I understand the desire to anticipate lots of new general members, but this is still a change that works in the opposite direction of what is called for. We shouldn't even need a petition process, it's been rarely utilized, and today we have the shining example of two excluded, but qualified Board candidates. I still have yet to hear anybody tell me why the NomCom should have the power to exclude qualified candidates. Nor why the more open and inclusive RIPE method shouldn't be adopted here. We've had multiple people indicate the real historic need for the NomCom is in finding candidates, let them stick to that. Adding larger petition requirements is tone deaf. Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:38:09 -0400 John Curran wrote ---- Mike - To be clear, the most recent petition process had a threshold of 124 members (based on 2% of the 6183 eligible general members at election cutoff) ? the proposed bylaw language would have had no effect since it simply sets a minimum of 100 for such a process.? The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest floor was a reasonable precaution. ? While we?re making it possible for more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote in ARIN?s elections.) Due to this uncertainty of the long-term general member count, it appeared prudent to provide a minimum for this petition requirement even if never needed.? I hope this helps clarify the reasoning behind the proposed text ? there was no intent to ?make petitions harder? and it would be non-operative language if participation levels continue at present levels. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns wrote: I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? ? Regards, Mike ? ? From:?ARIN-announce ?On Behalf Of?ARIN Sent:?Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM To:?mailto:arin-announce at arin.net Subject:?[arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure ? The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at:?http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net?will close on 12 November 2021. ? Regards, ? John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ? ? ? ? _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (mailto:ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult?Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at?mailto:info at arin.net?if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mike at iptrading.com Thu Oct 28 18:50:19 2021 From: mike at iptrading.com (Mike Burns) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:50:19 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?b?Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7W2Fy?= =?utf-8?q?in-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_AR?= =?utf-8?q?IN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <17cc9154e6a.fad3d13a2696504.7893291223603333780@iptrading.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <17cc9154e6a.fad3d13a2696504.7893291223603333780@iptrading.com> Message-ID: <17cc918d080.c1b3652d2696773.4357170088415359372@iptrading.com> Hi John, Not to mention that if the general membership grows, so does the already-too-high petition requirement, so why include the minimum language? Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:46:29 -0400 Mike Burns wrote ---- Hi John, I understand the desire to anticipate lots of new general members, but this is still a change that works in the opposite direction of what is called for. We shouldn't even need a petition process, it's been rarely utilized, and today we have the shining example of two excluded, but qualified Board candidates. I still have yet to hear anybody tell me why the NomCom should have the power to exclude qualified candidates. Nor why the more open and inclusive RIPE method shouldn't be adopted here. We've had multiple people indicate the real historic need for the NomCom is in finding candidates, let them stick to that. Adding larger petition requirements is tone deaf. Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:38:09 -0400 John Curran wrote ---- Mike - To be clear, the most recent petition process had a threshold of 124 members (based on 2% of the 6183 eligible general members at election cutoff) ? the proposed bylaw language would have had no effect since it simply sets a minimum of 100 for such a process.? The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest floor was a reasonable precaution. ? While we?re making it possible for more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote in ARIN?s elections.) Due to this uncertainty of the long-term general member count, it appeared prudent to provide a minimum for this petition requirement even if never needed.? I hope this helps clarify the reasoning behind the proposed text ? there was no intent to ?make petitions harder? and it would be non-operative language if participation levels continue at present levels. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns wrote: I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? ? Regards, Mike ? ? From:?ARIN-announce ?On Behalf Of?ARIN Sent:?Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM To:?mailto:arin-announce at arin.net Subject:?[arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure ? The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at:?http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net?will close on 12 November 2021. ? Regards, ? John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ? ? ? ? _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (mailto:ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult?Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at?mailto:info at arin.net?if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ 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: https://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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jcurran at arin.net Thu Oct 28 18:53:16 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 22:53:16 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?b?Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7W2Fy?= =?utf-8?q?in-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_AR?= =?utf-8?q?IN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <17cc9154e6a.fad3d13a2696504.7893291223603333780@iptrading.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <17cc9154e6a.fad3d13a2696504.7893291223603333780@iptrading.com> Message-ID: <18A219E9-F5C0-4543-AC93-FEED344B9E20@arin.net> Mike - For this consultation, please focus on the proposed membership changes. I believe it is clear that you are against the floor on petition threshold included in these bylaw changes, but what about the main membership changes being proposed (bringing end-users into membership, and having all members vote at least once every three to maintain General Member status) - what are your views on that, and/or are there any other aspects of it that you feel need to be changed? Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 6:46 PM, Mike Burns > wrote: Hi John, I understand the desire to anticipate lots of new general members, but this is still a change that works in the opposite direction of what is called for. We shouldn't even need a petition process, it's been rarely utilized, and today we have the shining example of two excluded, but qualified Board candidates. I still have yet to hear anybody tell me why the NomCom should have the power to exclude qualified candidates. Nor why the more open and inclusive RIPE method shouldn't be adopted here. We've had multiple people indicate the real historic need for the NomCom is in finding candidates, let them stick to that. Adding larger petition requirements is tone deaf. Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:38:09 -0400 John Curran > wrote ---- Mike - To be clear, the most recent petition process had a threshold of 124 members (based on 2% of the 6183 eligible general members at election cutoff) ? the proposed bylaw language would have had no effect since it simply sets a minimum of 100 for such a process. The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest floor was a reasonable precaution. While we?re making it possible for more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote in ARIN?s elections.) Due to this uncertainty of the long-term general member count, it appeared prudent to provide a minimum for this petition requirement even if never needed. I hope this helps clarify the reasoning behind the proposed text ? there was no intent to ?make petitions harder? and it would be non-operative language if participation levels continue at present levels. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns > wrote: I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? Regards, Mike From: ARIN-announce > On Behalf Of ARIN Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM To: arin-announce at arin.net Subject: [arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 12 November 2021. Regards, John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) _______________________________________________ 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: https://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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mike at iptrading.com Thu Oct 28 18:58:08 2021 From: mike at iptrading.com (Mike Burns) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:58:08 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?b?Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7W2Fy?= =?utf-8?q?in-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_AR?= =?utf-8?q?IN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <18A219E9-F5C0-4543-AC93-FEED344B9E20@arin.net> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <17cc9154e6a.fad3d13a2696504.7893291223603333780@iptrading.com> <18A219E9-F5C0-4543-AC93-FEED344B9E20@arin.net> Message-ID: <17cc91ffaa3.1221ba17b2697420.8184740953696879172@iptrading.com> Hi John, Sorry, I didn't realize that certain parts of the changed document were circumscribed as not commentable. I figured anything in blue was fair game. What happens to the petition count in the immediate years after the changes to membership? Are the new members counted towards the 2%, or only after they become General members by voting? In year one, year two? Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:53:16 -0400 John Curran wrote ---- Mike -? For this consultation, please focus on the proposed membership changes. ?I believe it is clear that you are against the floor on petition threshold included in these bylaw changes, but what about the main membership changes being proposed (bringing end-users into membership, and having all members vote at least once every three to maintain General Member status) - what are your views on that, and/or are there any other aspects of it that you feel need to be changed? Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 6:46 PM, Mike Burns wrote: Hi John, I understand the desire to anticipate lots of new general members, but this is still a change that works in the opposite direction of what is called for. We shouldn't even need a petition process, it's been rarely utilized, and today we have the shining example of two excluded, but qualified Board candidates. I still have yet to hear anybody tell me why the NomCom should have the power to exclude qualified candidates. Nor why the more open and inclusive RIPE method shouldn't be adopted here. We've had multiple people indicate the real historic need for the NomCom is in finding candidates, let them stick to that. Adding larger petition requirements is tone deaf. Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:38:09 -0400 John Curran wrote ---- Mike - To be clear, the most recent petition process had a threshold of 124 members (based on 2% of the 6183 eligible general members at election cutoff) ? the proposed bylaw language would have had no effect since it simply sets a minimum of 100 for such a process.? The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest floor was a reasonable precaution. ? While we?re making it possible for more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote in ARIN?s elections.) Due to this uncertainty of the long-term general member count, it appeared prudent to provide a minimum for this petition requirement even if never needed.? I hope this helps clarify the reasoning behind the proposed text ? there was no intent to ?make petitions harder? and it would be non-operative language if participation levels continue at present levels. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns wrote: I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? ? Regards, Mike ? ? From:?ARIN-announce ?On Behalf Of?ARIN Sent:?Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM To:?mailto:arin-announce at arin.net Subject:?[arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure ? The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at:?http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net?will close on 12 November 2021. ? Regards, ? John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ? ? ? ? _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (mailto:ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult?Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at?mailto:info at arin.net?if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jcurran at arin.net Thu Oct 28 19:05:50 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 23:05:50 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?b?Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7W2Fy?= =?utf-8?q?in-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_AR?= =?utf-8?q?IN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <17cc918d080.c1b3652d2696773.4357170088415359372@iptrading.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <17cc9154e6a.fad3d13a2696504.7893291223603333780@iptrading.com> <17cc918d080.c1b3652d2696773.4357170088415359372@iptrading.com> Message-ID: <24E0634E-63CE-4554-BCAE-D628630E5A3B@arin.net> Mike - We do not know how many of the 7000 end-users will opt for general membership - I suspect a few end-user participants on this list will do so, and perhaps several hundred more (e.g. 300 to 500) Of our existing general membership, it is estimated that only about 1200 or so organizations have voted in one of the past three elections. If that is indicative of the 2021 - 2022 - 2023 election period, then in 2024 we would see many of the existing general members recategorized as service members and end up with a general membership of 1500 or so (300 + 1200 = 1500) 2% of 1500 is 30, so that could easily be the 2024 petition threshold absent the ?100 minimum? language. Realistically though, all of those who might participate in a petition then would be the same as the community today (or even larger given the end-users who consciously decide to become general members), and a petition threshold of 124 was satisfied by two candidates in the present election. Our petition threshold is set as a percentage of general members, so the moment that the general member count becomes reflective of the actively involved community rather than just the count of ISPs in ARIN, then the 2% petition threshold will drop ? and this despite the fact that the active community will be the same size as today or even larger. Best wishes, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 6:50 PM, Mike Burns > wrote: Hi John, Not to mention that if the general membership grows, so does the already-too-high petition requirement, so why include the minimum language? Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:46:29 -0400 Mike Burns > wrote ---- Hi John, I understand the desire to anticipate lots of new general members, but this is still a change that works in the opposite direction of what is called for. We shouldn't even need a petition process, it's been rarely utilized, and today we have the shining example of two excluded, but qualified Board candidates. I still have yet to hear anybody tell me why the NomCom should have the power to exclude qualified candidates. Nor why the more open and inclusive RIPE method shouldn't be adopted here. We've had multiple people indicate the real historic need for the NomCom is in finding candidates, let them stick to that. Adding larger petition requirements is tone deaf. Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:38:09 -0400 John Curran > wrote ---- Mike - To be clear, the most recent petition process had a threshold of 124 members (based on 2% of the 6183 eligible general members at election cutoff) ? the proposed bylaw language would have had no effect since it simply sets a minimum of 100 for such a process. The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest floor was a reasonable precaution. While we?re making it possible for more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote in ARIN?s elections.) Due to this uncertainty of the long-term general member count, it appeared prudent to provide a minimum for this petition requirement even if never needed. I hope this helps clarify the reasoning behind the proposed text ? there was no intent to ?make petitions harder? and it would be non-operative language if participation levels continue at present levels. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns > wrote: I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? Regards, Mike From: ARIN-announce > On Behalf Of ARIN Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM To: arin-announce at arin.net Subject: [arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 12 November 2021. Regards, John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) _______________________________________________ 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: https://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. _______________________________________________ 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: https://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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mike at iptrading.com Thu Oct 28 19:09:50 2021 From: mike at iptrading.com (Mike Burns) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 19:09:50 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?b?Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7W2Fy?= =?utf-8?q?in-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_AR?= =?utf-8?q?IN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <24E0634E-63CE-4554-BCAE-D628630E5A3B@arin.net> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <17cc9154e6a.fad3d13a2696504.7893291223603333780@iptrading.com> <17cc918d080.c1b3652d2696773.4357170088415359372@iptrading.com> <24E0634E-63CE-4554-BCAE-D628630E5A3B@arin.net> Message-ID: <17cc92aaf9d.11980f7be2698321.6373253151933551745@iptrading.com> Hi John, Thank you, that is helpful information. I still object to the additional language specifying a minimum for the petition, insofar as this relates to the change in membership situation I would like that objection recorded. On the issue at hand, the membership structure changes, I will listen for a while as I don't fee qualified to opine. Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 19:05:50 -0400 John Curran wrote ---- Mike -? We do not know how many of the 7000 end-users will opt for general membership - I suspect a few end-user participants on this list will do so, and perhaps several hundred more (e.g. 300 to 500)? Of our existing general membership, it is estimated that only about 1200 or so organizations have voted in one of the past three elections. ? If that is indicative of the 2021 - 2022 - 2023 election period, then in 2024 we would see many of the existing general members recategorized as service members and end up with a general membership of 1500 or so (300 + 1200 = 1500) 2% of 1500 is 30, so that could easily be the 2024 petition threshold absent the ?100 minimum? language. ? Realistically though, all of those who might participate in a petition then would be the same as the community today (or even larger given the end-users who consciously decide to become general members), and a petition threshold of 124 was satisfied by two candidates in the present election. ?? Our petition threshold is set as a percentage of general members, so the moment that the general member count becomes reflective of the actively involved community rather than just the count of ISPs in ARIN, then the 2% petition threshold will drop ? and this despite the fact that the active community will be the same size as today or even larger.? Best wishes,/John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 6:50 PM, Mike Burns wrote: Hi John, Not to mention that if the general membership grows, so does the already-too-high petition requirement, so why include the minimum language? Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:46:29 -0400 Mike Burns wrote ---- Hi John, I understand the desire to anticipate lots of new general members, but this is still a change that works in the opposite direction of what is called for. We shouldn't even need a petition process, it's been rarely utilized, and today we have the shining example of two excluded, but qualified Board candidates. I still have yet to hear anybody tell me why the NomCom should have the power to exclude qualified candidates. Nor why the more open and inclusive RIPE method shouldn't be adopted here. We've had multiple people indicate the real historic need for the NomCom is in finding candidates, let them stick to that. Adding larger petition requirements is tone deaf. Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:38:09 -0400 John Curran wrote ---- Mike - To be clear, the most recent petition process had a threshold of 124 members (based on 2% of the 6183 eligible general members at election cutoff) ? the proposed bylaw language would have had no effect since it simply sets a minimum of 100 for such a process.? The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest floor was a reasonable precaution. ? While we?re making it possible for more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote in ARIN?s elections.) Due to this uncertainty of the long-term general member count, it appeared prudent to provide a minimum for this petition requirement even if never needed.? I hope this helps clarify the reasoning behind the proposed text ? there was no intent to ?make petitions harder? and it would be non-operative language if participation levels continue at present levels. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns wrote: I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? ? Regards, Mike ? ? From:?ARIN-announce ?On Behalf Of?ARIN Sent:?Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM To:?mailto:arin-announce at arin.net Subject:?[arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure ? The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at:?http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net?will close on 12 November 2021. ? Regards, ? John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ? ? ? ? _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (mailto:ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult?Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at?mailto:info at arin.net?if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (mailto:ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at mailto:info at arin.net if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jcurran at arin.net Thu Oct 28 19:13:10 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 23:13:10 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?b?Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7W2Fy?= =?utf-8?q?in-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_AR?= =?utf-8?q?IN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <17cc91ffaa3.1221ba17b2697420.8184740953696879172@iptrading.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <17cc9154e6a.fad3d13a2696504.7893291223603333780@iptrading.com> <18A219E9-F5C0-4543-AC93-FEED344B9E20@arin.net> <17cc91ffaa3.1221ba17b2697420.8184740953696879172@iptrading.com> Message-ID: Mike - My request to focus on the membership structure change aspects was simply in response to the more general election process questions you raised about the NomCom function, its power to exclude candidates, and approaches used in other organizations? all wonderful questions, but I ask that you bring them up during an open microphone session at the ARIN member meeting or once the forthcoming consultation on election process improvements is issued. Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 6:58 PM, Mike Burns > wrote: Hi John, Sorry, I didn't realize that certain parts of the changed document were circumscribed as not commentable. I figured anything in blue was fair game. What happens to the petition count in the immediate years after the changes to membership? Are the new members counted towards the 2%, or only after they become General members by voting? In year one, year two? Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:53:16 -0400 John Curran > wrote ---- Mike - For this consultation, please focus on the proposed membership changes. I believe it is clear that you are against the floor on petition threshold included in these bylaw changes, but what about the main membership changes being proposed (bringing end-users into membership, and having all members vote at least once every three to maintain General Member status) - what are your views on that, and/or are there any other aspects of it that you feel need to be changed? Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 6:46 PM, Mike Burns > wrote: Hi John, I understand the desire to anticipate lots of new general members, but this is still a change that works in the opposite direction of what is called for. We shouldn't even need a petition process, it's been rarely utilized, and today we have the shining example of two excluded, but qualified Board candidates. I still have yet to hear anybody tell me why the NomCom should have the power to exclude qualified candidates. Nor why the more open and inclusive RIPE method shouldn't be adopted here. We've had multiple people indicate the real historic need for the NomCom is in finding candidates, let them stick to that. Adding larger petition requirements is tone deaf. Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:38:09 -0400 John Curran > wrote ---- Mike - To be clear, the most recent petition process had a threshold of 124 members (based on 2% of the 6183 eligible general members at election cutoff) ? the proposed bylaw language would have had no effect since it simply sets a minimum of 100 for such a process. The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest floor was a reasonable precaution. While we?re making it possible for more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote in ARIN?s elections.) Due to this uncertainty of the long-term general member count, it appeared prudent to provide a minimum for this petition requirement even if never needed. I hope this helps clarify the reasoning behind the proposed text ? there was no intent to ?make petitions harder? and it would be non-operative language if participation levels continue at present levels. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns > wrote: I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? Regards, Mike From: ARIN-announce > On Behalf Of ARIN Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM To: arin-announce at arin.net Subject: [arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 12 November 2021. Regards, John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) _______________________________________________ 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: https://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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mike at iptrading.com Thu Oct 28 19:17:15 2021 From: mike at iptrading.com (Mike Burns) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 19:17:15 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?b?Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7W2Fy?= =?utf-8?q?in-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_AR?= =?utf-8?q?IN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <17cc9154e6a.fad3d13a2696504.7893291223603333780@iptrading.com> <18A219E9-F5C0-4543-AC93-FEED344B9E20@arin.net> <17cc91ffaa3.1221ba17b2697420.8184740953696879172@iptrading.com> Message-ID: <17cc9317899.ca54657a2698921.5405019730361519975@iptrading.com> Hi John, Fair enough. See you in Minneapolis. Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 19:13:10 -0400 John Curran wrote ---- Mike - My request to focus on the membership structure change aspects was simply in response to the more general election process questions you raised about the NomCom function, its power to exclude candidates, and approaches used in other organizations? ?all wonderful questions, but I ask that you bring them up during an open microphone session at the ARIN member meeting or once the forthcoming consultation on election process improvements is issued.? Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 6:58 PM, Mike Burns wrote: Hi John, Sorry, I didn't realize that certain parts of the changed document were circumscribed as not commentable. I figured anything in blue was fair game. What happens to the petition count in the immediate years after the changes to membership? Are the new members counted towards the 2%, or only after they become General members by voting? In year one, year two? Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:53:16 -0400 John Curran wrote ---- Mike -? For this consultation, please focus on the proposed membership changes. ?I believe it is clear that you are against the floor on petition threshold included in these bylaw changes, but what about the main membership changes being proposed (bringing end-users into membership, and having all members vote at least once every three to maintain General Member status) - what are your views on that, and/or are there any other aspects of it that you feel need to be changed? Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 6:46 PM, Mike Burns wrote: Hi John, I understand the desire to anticipate lots of new general members, but this is still a change that works in the opposite direction of what is called for. We shouldn't even need a petition process, it's been rarely utilized, and today we have the shining example of two excluded, but qualified Board candidates. I still have yet to hear anybody tell me why the NomCom should have the power to exclude qualified candidates. Nor why the more open and inclusive RIPE method shouldn't be adopted here. We've had multiple people indicate the real historic need for the NomCom is in finding candidates, let them stick to that. Adding larger petition requirements is tone deaf. Regards, Mike ---- On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:38:09 -0400 John Curran wrote ---- Mike - To be clear, the most recent petition process had a threshold of 124 members (based on 2% of the 6183 eligible general members at election cutoff) ? the proposed bylaw language would have had no effect since it simply sets a minimum of 100 for such a process.? The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest floor was a reasonable precaution. ? While we?re making it possible for more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote in ARIN?s elections.) Due to this uncertainty of the long-term general member count, it appeared prudent to provide a minimum for this petition requirement even if never needed.? I hope this helps clarify the reasoning behind the proposed text ? there was no intent to ?make petitions harder? and it would be non-operative language if participation levels continue at present levels. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On 28 Oct 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns wrote: I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? ? Regards, Mike ? ? From:?ARIN-announce ?On Behalf Of?ARIN Sent:?Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM To:?mailto:arin-announce at arin.net Subject:?[arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure ? The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at:?https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. Please provide comments to?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net. You can subscribe to this mailing list at:?http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. Discussion on?mailto:arin-consult at arin.net?will close on 12 November 2021. ? Regards, ? John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ? ? ? ? _______________________________________________ ARIN-Consult You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult Mailing List (mailto:ARIN-consult at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult?Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at?mailto:info at arin.net?if you experience any issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bill at herrin.us Thu Oct 28 20:29:55 2021 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:29:55 -0700 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultat?= =?utf-8?q?ion_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> References: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 1:47 PM ARIN wrote: > General members (whether existing or new ones who were > previously end user organizations and opted to become > General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to > maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election > and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast > a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become > Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General > Member status until after the coming year. Howdy, I sort of see the point. You don't want poorly informed single-issue voters dropping by for an outrage election and overwhelming the votes of the folks who've stayed well informed and participated over time. Is this really the best way to go about that? > The number of signatures required for petition nominations shall be > at least two percent (2%) of, but no less than one hundred (100) Adding the 100 vote floor strikes me as a dubious proposition. This isn't the gateway to win the election; it just lets someone on the ballot. I don't see any threat from allowing someone on the ballot if they only have 50 signatures. Or 20. There aren't so many people vying to hold ARIN offices that we need to strongly weed out the candidates. Worst case, they add to the dialog before being defeated. That's not a bad thing. > failure of any elected Candidate to assume >their< position I see the "singular they" is proposed to replace "his or her" in section 5a. If you said "the position" instead of "their position" you could avoid making a needless political statement about gender identity. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ From bill at herrin.us Thu Oct 28 20:56:32 2021 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:56:32 -0700 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultat?= =?utf-8?q?ion_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> References: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 1:47 PM ARIN wrote: > You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ For clarity: Is an organization holding only an AS number excluded from being a general member? Will their fees differ from other members? Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ From jcurran at arin.net Thu Oct 28 21:09:32 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 01:09:32 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?windows-1252?q?ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Co?= =?windows-1252?q?nsultation_on_ARIN=92s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> Message-ID: On 28 Oct 2021, at 8:56 PM, William Herrin > wrote: On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 1:47 PM ARIN > wrote: You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ For clarity: Is an organization holding only an AS number excluded from being a general member? Will their fees differ from other members? Bill - A reasonable question: ASN-only organizations are not affected by the fee harmonization change nor the membership structure change; i.e. they continue to pay the annual maintenance fee of $150 per ASN and are not eligible to be ARIN members. (Any ASN-only organization that obtains IPv4 to IPv6 resources under RSA just pays per the Registration Services Plan category [and no longer pays ASN maintenance service], becomes a service member, and can opt to become a general member if they wish.) Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From snoble at sonn.com Thu Oct 28 21:11:15 2021 From: snoble at sonn.com (Steve Noble) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:11:15 -0700 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultat?= =?utf-8?q?ion_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 5:56 PM William Herrin wrote: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 1:47 PM ARIN wrote: > > You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 > Membership categories and related FAQ at: > https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ > > For clarity: > > Is an organization holding only an AS number excluded from being a > general member? Will their fees differ from other members? > >From reading the membership faq, it appears that anyone who does not subscribe to the Registration Services Plan or alternately pay $500 a year is not considered a general member. So I as an ASN only customer am not a member and I did not get contacted about voting. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Thu Oct 28 23:55:02 2021 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 20:55:02 -0700 Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re=3A_=5BARIN-consult=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_?= =?utf-8?Q?Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> References: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> Message-ID: <7807E7A5-727D-4A90-8E6B-6B6FB261261B@delong.com> I am opposed to this change. This effectively imposes a disenfranchisement on dues paying members for at least one additional year if they choose to abstain or accidentally fail to vote in an ARIN election. Further, since you are jacking end user organizations for a steep fee increase in order to subsidize previous member organizations, giving them a non-voting status and making them opt-in for voting is unfair and amounts to a form of pole tax. Owen > On Oct 28, 2021, at 13:47 , ARIN wrote: > > The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. > > With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. > > The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. > > General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. > > Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf? > You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ > This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. > > Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net . You can subscribe to this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult . > > Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 12 November 2021. > > Regards, > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: > https://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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Fri Oct 29 00:00:45 2021 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 21:00:45 -0700 Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re=3A_=5BARIN-consult=5D__=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Cons?= =?utf-8?Q?ultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_?= =?utf-8?Q?Structure?= In-Reply-To: <88b7f593-d6db-87f3-269c-f62bfaa16349@wiktel.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <88b7f593-d6db-87f3-269c-f62bfaa16349@wiktel.com> Message-ID: <56ABB381-1C95-4C97-BC51-13544AB3C941@delong.com> Under the proposal, general members would be remaining members that participated in the last election + any disenfranchised^wservice members that demanded their voting rights be restored that have completed their 2 year disenfranchisement period. As such, the general members number could be quite volatile year to year and would be difficult to predict. I suspect that is the reason for the 100 safety valve proposal. Personally, I think we should stick with one category of membership and not be engineering ways to disenfranchise people for abstaining. Owen > On Oct 28, 2021, at 14:15 , Richard Laager wrote: > > Typos: > > 3a is missing a space after "members-only" > > 3c is missing "discussions" (I assume) after "members-only". > > > > If I'm understanding correctly, the change is to go from 2% of General Members to MIN(2% of General Members, 100). How many General Members are there? Without knowing what 2% of General Members is, it's hard to put the 100 minimum in context. > > -- > Richard > _______________________________________________ > 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: > https://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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bill at herrin.us Fri Oct 29 00:00:40 2021 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 21:00:40 -0700 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultat?= =?utf-8?q?ion_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 8:55 PM Owen DeLong via ARIN-consult wrote: > This effectively imposes a disenfranchisement on dues paying members for at least one additional year if they choose to abstain or accidentally fail to vote in an ARIN election. 3 elections. Unless I misunderstood, they have to miss 3 elections in a row. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ From owen at delong.com Fri Oct 29 00:05:10 2021 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 21:05:10 -0700 Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re=3A_=5BARIN-consult=5D__=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Cons?= =?utf-8?Q?ultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_?= =?utf-8?Q?Structure?= In-Reply-To: <6D245ABE-ACC1-4DA1-87ED-04BCC5AE8ABB@arin.net> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <88b7f593-d6db-87f3-269c-f62bfaa16349@wiktel.com> <6D245ABE-ACC1-4DA1-87ED-04BCC5AE8ABB@arin.net> Message-ID: <70E6B80C-D55A-4F4A-896F-580B34C6D889@delong.com> Correction? Under the previously stated disenfranchisement proposal, and the already published 2022 fee schedule, end-user member organizations are being coerced into membership whether they want it or not, and as a result, the board is attempting to create a new category of membership specifically designed to disenfranchise them by default. They will all be members, whether they choose it or not. The question is whether they will be disenfranchised^wservice members or voting members. Owen > On Oct 28, 2021, at 14:19 , Paul Andersen - ARIN wrote: > > > Richard, > > It is hard to predict future actions since the membership will fluctuate based on engagement in the process. Looking at the last election: > > https://www.arin.net/announcements/20201103_election/ > > There were 603 Member Orgs who voted for the BoT, 595 who voted for the AC. I?d make an educated guess that there is high overlap between the two. But a larger pool of potential members will come with the End Users who will be eligible to become members but it is hard to know how many will want to be engaged. Nor can we tell whether a mandate to vote to stay a member may engage more members. > > P. > > > > >> On Oct 28, 2021, at 5:15 PM, Richard Laager > wrote: >> >> If I'm understanding correctly, the change is to go from 2% of General Members to MIN(2% of General Members, 100). How many General Members are there? Without knowing what 2% of General Members is, it's hard to put the 100 minimum in context. >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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: > https://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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Fri Oct 29 00:08:25 2021 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 21:08:25 -0700 Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re=3A_=5BARIN-consult=5D__=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Cons?= =?utf-8?Q?ultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership?= =?utf-8?Q?_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> Message-ID: <15161189-AB38-44DC-A087-29CE8BB26A5A@delong.com> I guess that depends on whether this year?s nominating committee behavior is a new trend or an anomaly. IIRC, there have been other instances in the past where the nominating committee has rejected perfectly qualified candidates without a full slate that have not resulted in petitions. The black box nominating committee has never sat well with me. Unfortunately, I cannot discuss the problems I observed the one time I crawled into the black box. Owen > On Oct 28, 2021, at 14:33 , Paul Andersen - ARIN wrote: > > Mike, > > As noted we are not looking to get into individual NomCom feedback until the current process has come closer to conclusion; however, as you are tying it to this consolation I think it is important to raise that we don?t see Petitions as ?Black Eyes? or a complete failure of the system. If they were occurring every year that would be one thing - but one use of the petition process in two decades speaks to the success of ARIN?s governance. That is not to say there has not been much useful feedback and suggestions learned from this cycle and as mentioned - they will be considered in due time. > > The current threshold was well over 100 and both candidates were successful. > > P. > > >> On Oct 28, 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns > wrote: >> >> I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? >> >> Regards, >> Mike >> >> >> From: ARIN-announce > On Behalf Of ARIN >> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM >> To: arin-announce at arin.net >> Subject: [arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure >> >> The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. >> >> With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. >> >> The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. >> >> General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. >> >> Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf? >> You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ >> This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. >> >> Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net . You can subscribe to this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult . >> >> Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 12 November 2021. >> >> Regards, >> >> John Curran >> President and CEO >> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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: >> https://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. > > _______________________________________________ > 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: > https://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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Fri Oct 29 00:11:09 2021 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 21:11:09 -0700 Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re=3A_=5BARIN-consult=5D__=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Cons?= =?utf-8?Q?ultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership?= =?utf-8?Q?_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> Message-ID: <39F807BF-9924-4D20-BAB9-B6CC9B920764@delong.com> Right, so if you get down to less than 2,000 general members, a petition requires 100 of them to sign. If you get down to 99 general members and everyone else has become a service member, petitions become impossible. Am I missing something? Shouldn?t at least the petition signature process be open to all members and not just general members? Owen > On Oct 28, 2021, at 14:38 , John Curran wrote: > > Mike - > > To be clear, the most recent petition process had a threshold of 124 members (based on 2% of the 6183 eligible general members at election cutoff) ? the proposed bylaw language would have had no effect since it simply sets a minimum of 100 for such a process. > > The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest floor was a reasonable precaution. While we?re making it possible for more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote in ARIN?s elections.) > > Due to this uncertainty of the long-term general member count, it appeared prudent to provide a minimum for this petition requirement even if never needed. > > I hope this helps clarify the reasoning behind the proposed text ? there was no intent to ?make petitions harder? and it would be non-operative language if participation levels continue at present levels. > > Thanks, > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers > > >> On 28 Oct 2021, at 5:05 PM, Mike Burns > wrote: >> >> I oppose the language requiring a minimum of 100 votes for a successful petition and I suggest the number of votes required for a successful petition be lowered significantly, given the paltry number of participants on the ARIN lists and the abbreviated timeframe for acquiring signatures. We are in a time where the NomCom is being questioned severely, and when not one, but two successful petitions have just completed. That?s two black eyes for the NomCom, why in the world would we be making petitions harder at this time? >> >> Regards, >> Mike >> >> >> From: ARIN-announce > On Behalf Of ARIN >> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:47 PM >> To: arin-announce at arin.net >> Subject: [arin-announce] ACSP Consultation 2021.5: Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure >> >> The purpose of this consultation is to provide our customers ARIN?s plan for membership going forward and to seek feedback on planned changes to ARIN?s membership structure for 2022. >> >> With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. >> >> The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member criteria. >> >> General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. >> >> Please view the proposed related Bylaws changes at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/bylaws_redline_102821.pdf? >> You may also review a more detailed description of the proposed 2022 Membership categories and related FAQ at: https://arin.net/participate/oversight/membership/index2022/ >> This consultation will remain open for 15 days, after which a summary will be provided to the Board of Trustees for their consideration. This proposed change to ARIN?s bylaws may be implemented independently or in addition to any other bylaw changes approved by the Board (including consultation if necessary) in accordance with the bylaws. >> >> Please provide comments to arin-consult at arin.net . You can subscribe to this mailing list at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult . >> >> Discussion on arin-consult at arin.net will close on 12 November 2021. >> >> Regards, >> >> John Curran >> President and CEO >> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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: >> https://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. > > _______________________________________________ > 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: > https://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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Fri Oct 29 00:17:42 2021 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 21:17:42 -0700 Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re=3A_=5BARIN-consult=5D__=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Cons?= =?utf-8?Q?ultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_?= =?utf-8?Q?Structure?= In-Reply-To: <21E41B77-ED82-40E3-B059-3B07AFE354A2@arin.net> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <88b7f593-d6db-87f3-269c-f62bfaa16349@wiktel.com> <6D245ABE-ACC1-4DA1-87ED-04BCC5AE8ABB@arin.net> <0038e3c1-cf66-dae6-a55f-963bbdceb462@wiktel.com> <21E41B77-ED82-40E3-B059-3B07AFE354A2@arin.net> Message-ID: <4ADC202B-16B2-4758-87D1-3A0BA6A1A3F0@delong.com> > On Oct 28, 2021, at 14:42 , Paul Andersen - ARIN wrote: > > > >> On Oct 28, 2021, at 5:24 PM, Richard Laager > wrote: >> >> On 10/28/21 4:19 PM, Paul Andersen - ARIN wrote: >>> >>> There were 603 Member Orgs who voted for the BoT, 595 who voted for the AC. I?d make an educated guess that there is high overlap between the two. But a larger pool of potential members will come with the End Users who will be eligible to become members but it is hard to know how many will want to be engaged. Nor can we tell whether a mandate to vote to stay a member may engage more members. >> So the nomination-by-petition threshold is being raised from 2% of ~600 = 10 to 100. That's quite a big jump. What's the rationale for this >> > > The number of voting members isn?t expected to drop since we?ve had a pretty steady count the past five years. > > 2020 - 603 > 2019 - 545 > 2018 - 660 > 2017 - 491 > 2016 - 583 > But? That means that if this had been in place in 2015, that in 2017, the 491 voters would have to have been made up entirely of new members + some true subset of the 583 that voted in 2016. In 2018, you couldn?t have achieved 660 voters unless 169 additional voters came from some combination of 2015-disenfranchisees and 2017 new members. So your number in 2018 would likely have been far less than 660. In fact, it seems to me that this process is very likely to create a continuing downward trend in the number of active voters by creating a downward trend in eligible voters even without membership attrition. > And I think we can safely assume a noticeable increase from end users given many are engaged on the lists and now have the ability to become members. They?ve had the ability to become members for quite some time now. Now they are being coerced into membership whether they want it or not, along with a substantial fee hike in exchange for the privilege. > But an obvious side effect of this proposal is there will be a drop at some point when those who have chosen not to stay as an engaged member drop off which throws off the percentages. I don?t think the thresholds in reality will be hard to achieve but welcome the feedback. It?ll get pretty exciting if/when you end up with <100 ?general? members and someone wants to petition. >> Separately, what's the rationale for requiring active voting to maintain voting rights? >> > > There are organizations who come to ARIN (sometimes frequently, sometimes once in a blue moon) and just want to use ARIN services and do not wish to be general members and this change allows that. For those that do choose to become members we are asking them to show their commitment to some degree of engagement. This was seen as a simple to track method; however, I think we?d very much welcome suggestions that are not burdensome on the organization to track. How about something more like annual POC validation that asks the voting contact for the organization to choose a simple ?Yes/No? to ?Do you wish to remain the voting contact for $ORG?? once a year? Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bill at herrin.us Fri Oct 29 00:22:44 2021 From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 21:22:44 -0700 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultat?= =?utf-8?q?ion_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> References: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 1:47 PM ARIN wrote: > General members (whether existing or new ones who were previously end user organizations and opted to become General Members) must participate in ARIN Elections to maintain their status. Following the 2023 ARIN annual election and each election thereafter, General Members that did not cast a ballot in any of the previous three ARIN elections will become Service Members and will not be eligible to apply for General Member status until after the coming year. I notice that this text is not in the bylaws change. The way the bylaws have been rewritten, the sitting board of trustees can redefine the qualifications for who is permitted to vote in elections for the board of trustees at any time with immediate effect, leaving no obvious recourse for anyone disenfranchised by the change. A general member must "meet any eligibility requirements" defined by the BoT with no restrictions on the BoT altering those requirements. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill at herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/ From owen at delong.com Fri Oct 29 00:28:12 2021 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 21:28:12 -0700 Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re=3A_=5BARIN-consult=5D_=26nbsp=3B=26nbsp=3B=26nbsp=3B?= =?utf-8?Q?=26nbsp=3B=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Con?= =?utf-8?Q?sultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <24E0634E-63CE-4554-BCAE-D628630E5A3B@arin.net> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <17cc9154e6a.fad3d13a2696504.7893291223603333780@iptrading.com> <17cc918d080.c1b3652d2696773.4357170088415359372@iptrading.com> <24E0634E-63CE-4554-BCAE-D628630E5A3B@arin.net> Message-ID: <5CF01716-E60C-4419-A5E0-ECD5EB151265@delong.com> > On Oct 28, 2021, at 16:05 , John Curran wrote: > > Mike - > > We do not know how many of the 7000 end-users will opt for general membership - I suspect a few end-user participants on this list will do so, and perhaps several hundred more (e.g. 300 to 500) Both of me will. > Of our existing general membership, it is estimated that only about 1200 or so organizations have voted in one of the past three elections. If that is indicative of the 2021 - 2022 - 2023 election period, then in 2024 we would see many of the existing general members recategorized as service members and end up with a general membership of 1500 or so (300 + 1200 = 1500) Given that roughly 600 organizations participated in each of the past three elections, a total of 1200 organizations is a surprisingly low overlap amongst voting organizations across three years. > 2% of 1500 is 30, so that could easily be the 2024 petition threshold absent the ?100 minimum? language. Realistically though, all of those who might participate in a petition then would be the same as the community today (or even larger given the end-users who consciously decide to become general members), and a petition threshold of 124 was satisfied by two candidates in the present election. What?s wrong with a petition threshold of 30 among 1500 eligible signatories? > Our petition threshold is set as a percentage of general members, so the moment that the general member count becomes reflective of the actively involved community rather than just the count of ISPs in ARIN, then the 2% petition threshold will drop ? and this despite the fact that the active community will be the same size as today or even larger. The problem is that it won?t drop as far as it should. Unless you?re claiming that 100% of petition signatories are from the ?active community? in this election, I think Mike is right about the tone deafness of this move. It takes a pretty impressive level of tone deafness to produce a result where Mike Burns and I agree on something. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jcurran at arin.net Fri Oct 29 06:04:57 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 10:04:57 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultat?= =?utf-8?q?ion_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> Message-ID: <684F2C3A-A865-4DE4-9B00-E9D3573EC7AC@arin.net> On 29 Oct 2021, at 12:00 AM, William Herrin wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 8:55 PM Owen DeLong via ARIN-consult > wrote: >> This effectively imposes a disenfranchisement on dues paying members for at least one additional year if they choose to abstain or accidentally fail to vote in an ARIN election. > > 3 elections. Unless I misunderstood, they have to miss 3 elections in a row. Bill - That is correct: general members who voted in any of the past three annual elections are fine ? it is only if you fail to vote in each of the previous three elections that an organization reverts to service members for the coming year. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers From jcurran at arin.net Fri Oct 29 06:26:53 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 10:26:53 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <39F807BF-9924-4D20-BAB9-B6CC9B920764@delong.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <39F807BF-9924-4D20-BAB9-B6CC9B920764@delong.com> Message-ID: On 29 Oct 2021, at 12:11 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > Right, so if you get down to less than 2,000 general members, a petition requires 100 of them to sign. > > If you get down to 99 general members and everyone else has become a service member, petitions become impossible. Given that we presently have more than 500 organizations voting each year (and are about to double the number of organizations that can vote in ARIN elections), the general membership is highly unlikely to ever be less than 100... > Am I missing something? See above. > Shouldn?t at least the petition signature process be open to all members and not just general members? As we?ve discovered in the past, there?s many organizations that simply wish to receive ARIN services and not be bothered with the various aspects of ARIN governance such as nominations, elections and petitions. Any service member that wishes to participate in ARIN governance can readily do but does pick up a rather light obligation to vote at least once every three years to maintain that right ? and an organization that fails to do so only loses that right to be a general member for the coming year. If an organization wishes to participate an upcoming election, it simply needs to opt into general membership (including assigning a voting contact) before the list of eligible voters for the election is set ? this happens approximately 45 days before the election (and is an existing requirement today or those who wish to support a petition; one must be an eligible voter for the election in order to participate in the petition process.) Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers From mcr at sandelman.ca Fri Oct 29 10:33:22 2021 From: mcr at sandelman.ca (Michael Richardson) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 10:33:22 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultat?= =?utf-8?q?ion_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> References: <6FC1AA0F-173A-4454-A093-D18E897DB085@arin.net> Message-ID: <8470.1635518002@localhost> ARIN wrote: > With the change to a single fee schedule in 2022 (fee harmonization) > for end user and ISP organizations, ARIN wishes to open up > participation in ARIN governance to end user organizations that were > previously unable to vote in ARIN elections. When the end user > organizations are transitioned to the Registration Services Plan, they > will be made Service Members of ARIN. This category is an addition to > the existing membership categories. The addition of a new membership > category requires a modification to the Bylaws, linked below. This process is a surprise to me, but maybe I'm just not very well informed. How many end-user organizations are there? > The distinguishing characteristic between Service and General Member > categories is related to the commitment to vote in ARIN?s > elections. Any Service Member organization may apply to become a > General Member by submitting a request and meeting the General Member > criteria. okay. My entity pays $250USD/year, and I gather from comments from William that I wouldn't wind up in the General Member. I have in the past voted. But I think that my entity is not an end-user organization, having v4, v6 and ASN resources, and delegating to end-users. I try to keep abreast on what is going on. I think that the step function between being ignorant and uninvolved, and being informed is too high. Most organizations do not have the cycles to be involved in arin-consult. Most weeks, it goes to /dev/null for me, but not every week. -- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [ ] mcr at sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 487 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mcr at sandelman.ca Fri Oct 29 10:38:19 2021 From: mcr at sandelman.ca (Michael Richardson) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 10:38:19 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> Message-ID: <9791.1635518299@localhost> John Curran wrote: > The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know > what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest > floor was a reasonable precaution. While we?re making it possible for > more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general > members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of > existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote > in ARIN?s elections.) I asked how many end-user organizations were potentially new members, and this tells me 7000. And previously we've had ~600 ISP members involved in things. There is definitely the potential to swamp the current "enfranchisment", but I doubt more than 10% of the 7000 will notice or care. And if they *do* get involved, then they should be enfranchised. The only reason I can see to do this 3-elections-miss and you are out is if there is some quorum issue. That's not to trivialize that issue, but maybe a better definition of quorum would be better. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 487 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mcr at sandelman.ca Fri Oct 29 10:40:14 2021 From: mcr at sandelman.ca (Michael Richardson) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 10:40:14 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?b?Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7W2Fy?= =?utf-8?q?in-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_AR?= =?utf-8?q?IN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <24E0634E-63CE-4554-BCAE-D628630E5A3B@arin.net> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <17cc9154e6a.fad3d13a2696504.7893291223603333780@iptrading.com> <17cc918d080.c1b3652d2696773.4357170088415359372@iptrading.com> <24E0634E-63CE-4554-BCAE-D628630E5A3B@arin.net> Message-ID: <10320.1635518414@localhost> John Curran wrote: > Our petition threshold is set as a percentage of general members, so > the moment that the general member count becomes reflective of the > actively involved community rather than just the count of ISPs in ARIN, > then the 2% petition threshold will drop ? and this despite the fact > that the active community will be the same size as today or even > larger. Why not set the petition threshold to be a running average of the past 3-4 years of electoral turnout? That would accomodate changes well without screwing up the process. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 487 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jcurran at arin.net Fri Oct 29 12:04:18 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 16:04:18 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?b?Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7W2Fy?= =?utf-8?q?in-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_AR?= =?utf-8?q?IN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <10320.1635518414@localhost> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <17cc9154e6a.fad3d13a2696504.7893291223603333780@iptrading.com> <17cc918d080.c1b3652d2696773.4357170088415359372@iptrading.com> <24E0634E-63CE-4554-BCAE-D628630E5A3B@arin.net> <10320.1635518414@localhost> Message-ID: <68D028EB-952C-4580-B329-F50AEB518F65@arin.net> MIchael - FYI - We?ll not be addressing suggestions to change ARIN's election process while we have an election is presently underway ? you should hold such discussion until this election cycle is over. We have several suggestions that have already been submitted regarding ARIN?s election process, and you can wait until those are considered or submit your own to the ARIN Consultation and Suggestion Process > as you prefer. The consultation presently before us is for discussion on the change to ARIN?s membership structure to add a service member category and provide for service members who wish to become general members with voting privileges. Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers > On 29 Oct 2021, at 10:40 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: > > Signed PGP part > > John Curran wrote: >> Our petition threshold is set as a percentage of general members, so >> the moment that the general member count becomes reflective of the >> actively involved community rather than just the count of ISPs in ARIN, >> then the 2% petition threshold will drop ? and this despite the fact >> that the active community will be the same size as today or even >> larger. > > Why not set the petition threshold to be a running average of the past 3-4 > years of electoral turnout? That would accomodate changes well without > screwing up the process. > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: From jcurran at arin.net Fri Oct 29 12:08:46 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 16:08:46 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <9791.1635518299@localhost> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <9791.1635518299@localhost> Message-ID: <37ABC0C8-0717-4155-9B8E-DFB4CCADDAB1@arin.net> On 29 Oct 2021, at 10:38 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: > > Signed PGP part > > John Curran wrote: >> The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know >> what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest >> floor was a reasonable precaution. While we?re making it possible for >> more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general >> members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of >> existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote >> in ARIN?s elections.) > > I asked how many end-user organizations were potentially new members, and > this tells me 7000. And previously we've had ~600 ISP members involved in > things. Indeed. About 600 to 700 - it varies by election and we believe encompasses about 1000 organizations total (there?s some consolidation of organizations which makes a precise number difficult) > There is definitely the potential to swamp the current "enfranchisment", but > I doubt more than 10% of the 7000 will notice or care. > And if they *do* get involved, then they should be enfranchised. Agreed. And they opt to be general members simply by asking (and assigning a voter point of contact to their organization) > The only reason I can see to do this 3-elections-miss and you are out is if > there is some quorum issue. That's not to trivialize that issue, but maybe a > better definition of quorum would be better. We should have a easily quantified community of those interested in ARIN governance, as this would allow for the Board and organization to more easily engage with the members who wish to be involved. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers From gary.buhrmaster at gmail.com Fri Oct 29 12:19:52 2021 From: gary.buhrmaster at gmail.com (Gary Buhrmaster) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 16:19:52 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Str?= =?utf-8?q?ucture?= In-Reply-To: <37ABC0C8-0717-4155-9B8E-DFB4CCADDAB1@arin.net> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <9791.1635518299@localhost> <37ABC0C8-0717-4155-9B8E-DFB4CCADDAB1@arin.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 4:08 PM John Curran wrote: > > Indeed. About 600 to 700 - it varies by election and we believe encompasses about 1000 organizations total (there?s some consolidation of organizations which makes a precise number difficult) > I am not sure if you have an (accurate) number, or are at liberty to share, but how many (actually) unique voters do you have? There are certainly some consulting companies who represent a number of orgs, and are likely to vote consistently across all those orgs (this is not a one person one vote situation, this can be a one consultant, multiple vote situation). From jcurran at arin.net Fri Oct 29 12:30:40 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 16:30:40 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <9791.1635518299@localhost> <37ABC0C8-0717-4155-9B8E-DFB4CCADDAB1@arin.net> Message-ID: On 29 Oct 2021, at 12:19 PM, Gary Buhrmaster > wrote: On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 4:08 PM John Curran > wrote: Indeed. About 600 to 700 - it varies by election and we believe encompasses about 1000 organizations total (there?s some consolidation of organizations which makes a precise number difficult) I am not sure if you have an (accurate) number, or are at liberty to share, but how many (actually) unique voters do you have? There are certainly some consulting companies who represent a number of orgs, and are likely to vote consistently across all those orgs (this is not a one person one vote situation, this can be a one consultant, multiple vote situation). Gary - That is correct - in fact, there are some voting contacts that represent more than 10 ARIN organizations (e.g. in companies that have multiple business units each with their own ARIN organization) You can get some idea of voting contacts versus organizations from each year?s election report - e.g. Board Trustees Election - "Number of Voters: 490 (on behalf of 603 ARIN Member organizations) Percentage Voted: 9.3% of total voters (10.6% of total organizations)" (From https://www.arin.net/announcements/20201103_election/) Some quick math would suggest that in 2020 there were approximately 5268 voters total (490/9.3%) and 5698 organizations total (603/10.6%) FYI, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andrew.dul at quark.net Fri Oct 29 14:31:58 2021 From: andrew.dul at quark.net (Andrew Dul) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 11:31:58 -0700 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <39F807BF-9924-4D20-BAB9-B6CC9B920764@delong.com> Message-ID: On 10/29/2021 3:26 AM, John Curran wrote: > > As we?ve discovered in the past, there?s many organizations that simply wish to receive ARIN services and not be bothered with the various aspects of ARIN governance such as nominations, elections and petitions. > > Any service member that wishes to participate in ARIN governance can readily do but does pick up a rather light obligation to vote at least once every three years to maintain that right ? and an organization that fails to do so only loses that right to be a general member for the coming year. > > If an organization wishes to participate an upcoming election, it simply needs to opt into general membership (including assigning a voting contact) before the list of eligible voters for the election is set ? this happens approximately 45 days before the election (and is an existing requirement today or those who wish to support a petition; one must be an eligible voter for the election in order to participate in the petition process.) > Given that ARIN is giving all the end-users membership in 2022. Does ARIN plan to do an outreach to educate the end-users about the options available to them now as general members?? It only seems reasonable to me that ARIN do that so that old-end-users now new-service-members know they have the free right and option to vote and otherwise participate as general members. Which is to say, I guess I'm ok with the conversion, and that by default end-user-orgs are put into the service-member category, but we should at least explain to them all this and let them easily decide and provide easy directions for them to become general members.? Something like, login to ARIN online, click this button, fill out who the voting contact will be.? Hit OK! Thanks, Andrew From andrew.dul at quark.net Fri Oct 29 14:36:25 2021 From: andrew.dul at quark.net (Andrew Dul) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 11:36:25 -0700 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <9791.1635518299@localhost> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <9791.1635518299@localhost> Message-ID: On 10/29/2021 7:38 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: > John Curran wrote: > > The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know > > what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest > > floor was a reasonable precaution. While we?re making it possible for > > more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general > > members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of > > existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote > > in ARIN?s elections.) > > I asked how many end-user organizations were potentially new members, and > this tells me 7000. And previously we've had ~600 ISP members involved in > things. > Given the adoption of the structure as proposed, how many current general-members would have been demoted to service members in 2021 because they did not vote in 2020, 2019, & 2018? Thanks, Andrew From jcurran at arin.net Fri Oct 29 14:50:30 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 18:50:30 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <9791.1635518299@localhost>, Message-ID: Andrew - As noted earlier, it difficult to determine reliably, but our best estimate is that somewhere between 1000 and 1200 of our present 7542 general member organizations have voted in one of three previous elections. Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On Oct 29, 2021, at 2:36 PM, Andrew Dul wrote: ?On 10/29/2021 7:38 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: John Curran wrote: > The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know > what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest > floor was a reasonable precaution. While we?re making it possible for > more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general > members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of > existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote > in ARIN?s elections.) I asked how many end-user organizations were potentially new members, and this tells me 7000. And previously we've had ~600 ISP members involved in things. Given the adoption of the structure as proposed, how many current general-members would have been demoted to service members in 2021 because they did not vote in 2020, 2019, & 2018? Thanks, Andrew -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jcurran at arin.net Fri Oct 29 15:09:24 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 19:09:24 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <39F807BF-9924-4D20-BAB9-B6CC9B920764@delong.com> , Message-ID: <7A4FE746-AF4F-4ED5-BF6D-ADF8BF6D58F9@arin.net> Andrew - Yes we can do outreach (and even provide a reminder and link in ARIN Online.) As for just filling out your voting contact and clicking ?ok?, we can do something along those lines but probably need to be somewhat more circumspect detailing in the consequences of proceeding - For example - ?Your organization will be listed publicly on the ARIN general member list and in any list of eligible voters for ARIN elections.? One of these is required by VA Non-stock corporation act and doesn?t strictly need to be mentioned, but the other (while perhaps obvious) should be clear that it is a consent being provided by applying for general membership. Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On Oct 29, 2021, at 2:32 PM, Andrew Dul wrote: ?On 10/29/2021 3:26 AM, John Curran wrote: As we?ve discovered in the past, there?s many organizations that simply wish to receive ARIN services and not be bothered with the various aspects of ARIN governance such as nominations, elections and petitions. Any service member that wishes to participate in ARIN governance can readily do but does pick up a rather light obligation to vote at least once every three years to maintain that right ? and an organization that fails to do so only loses that right to be a general member for the coming year. If an organization wishes to participate an upcoming election, it simply needs to opt into general membership (including assigning a voting contact) before the list of eligible voters for the election is set ? this happens approximately 45 days before the election (and is an existing requirement today or those who wish to support a petition; one must be an eligible voter for the election in order to participate in the petition process.) Given that ARIN is giving all the end-users membership in 2022. Does ARIN plan to do an outreach to educate the end-users about the options available to them now as general members? It only seems reasonable to me that ARIN do that so that old-end-users now new-service-members know they have the free right and option to vote and otherwise participate as general members. Which is to say, I guess I'm ok with the conversion, and that by default end-user-orgs are put into the service-member category, but we should at least explain to them all this and let them easily decide and provide easy directions for them to become general members. Something like, login to ARIN online, click this button, fill out who the voting contact will be. Hit OK! Thanks, Andrew -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andrew.dul at quark.net Fri Oct 29 15:11:14 2021 From: andrew.dul at quark.net (Andrew Dul) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 12:11:14 -0700 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <9791.1635518299@localhost> Message-ID: Thanks John, I assume that this is because prior to now we did not specifically record which general-members voted in a specific election.? I assume this would be done going forward. Is the plan to capture this data for 2021?? And thus the first year for which existing general-members would be demoted would be 2024? Andrew On 10/29/2021 11:50 AM, John Curran wrote: > Andrew - > > As noted earlier, it difficult to determine reliably, but our best > estimate is that somewhere between 1000 and 1200 of our present 7542 > general member > organizations have voted in one of three previous elections. > > Thanks! > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > American Registry for Internet Numbers > > >> On Oct 29, 2021, at 2:36 PM, Andrew Dul wrote: >> >> ?On 10/29/2021 7:38 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: >>> John Curran wrote: >>> ????> The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not >>> know >>> ????> what the long-term general member count will be and felt that >>> a modest >>> ????> floor was a reasonable precaution. ??While we?re making it >>> possible for >>> ????> more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general >>> ????> members and participate in the election, we may see some >>> attrition of >>> ????> existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend >>> to vote >>> ????> in ARIN?s elections.) >>> >>> I asked how many end-user organizations were potentially new >>> members, and >>> this tells me 7000. ?And previously we've had ~600 ISP members >>> involved in >>> things. >>> >> Given the adoption of the structure as proposed, how many current >> general-members would have been demoted to service members in 2021 >> because they did not vote in 2020, 2019, & 2018? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Andrew >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jcurran at arin.net Fri Oct 29 15:25:28 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 19:25:28 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <9791.1635518299@localhost> , Message-ID: <6BBFF751-FCD7-45FB-B624-60F1CC614DB0@arin.net> Andrew - It?s a combination of having outsourced the election process _and_ allowing voting contacts for multiple organizations to cast multiple weight ballots that add up to their total number of orgs represented. (E.g If the voting contact for four organizations casts a single ballot of weight ?2? for some candidates and then never casts any other ballots, it is not ever stated which two of his four organizations just voted?) The organization is in the middle of a election software review and this is one of the issues we will definitely resolve. FYI, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On Oct 29, 2021, at 3:11 PM, Andrew Dul wrote: ? Thanks John, I assume that this is because prior to now we did not specifically record which general-members voted in a specific election. I assume this would be done going forward. Is the plan to capture this data for 2021? And thus the first year for which existing general-members would be demoted would be 2024? Andrew On 10/29/2021 11:50 AM, John Curran wrote: Andrew - As noted earlier, it difficult to determine reliably, but our best estimate is that somewhere between 1000 and 1200 of our present 7542 general member organizations have voted in one of three previous elections. Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers On Oct 29, 2021, at 2:36 PM, Andrew Dul wrote: ?On 10/29/2021 7:38 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: John Curran wrote: > The reason for inclusion of this language is because we do not know > what the long-term general member count will be and felt that a modest > floor was a reasonable precaution. While we?re making it possible for > more than 7000 end-user organizations to now also become general > members and participate in the election, we may see some attrition of > existing general members population (i.e. those who don?t tend to vote > in ARIN?s elections.) I asked how many end-user organizations were potentially new members, and this tells me 7000. And previously we've had ~600 ISP members involved in things. Given the adoption of the structure as proposed, how many current general-members would have been demoted to service members in 2021 because they did not vote in 2020, 2019, & 2018? Thanks, Andrew -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Sat Oct 30 17:22:00 2021 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2021 14:22:00 -0700 Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re=3A_=5BARIN-consult=5D__=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Cons?= =?utf-8?Q?ultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership?= =?utf-8?Q?_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <39F807BF-9924-4D20-BAB9-B6CC9B920764@delong.com> Message-ID: <29633FDD-DA0B-45B0-8B76-5C314C6777DC@delong.com> > On Oct 29, 2021, at 03:26 , John Curran wrote: > > On 29 Oct 2021, at 12:11 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> >> Right, so if you get down to less than 2,000 general members, a petition requires 100 of them to sign. >> >> If you get down to 99 general members and everyone else has become a service member, petitions become impossible. > > Given that we presently have more than 500 organizations voting each year (and are about to double the number of organizations that can vote in ARIN elections), the general membership is highly unlikely to ever be less than 100... > >> Am I missing something? > > See above. While I admit my perspective may be jaded by the fact that I oppose the entire concept of service members, if you must disenfranchise voters at the ballot box, I don?t think that disenfranchisement needs to preclude them from the nominating or petition process. Personally, I still think that the petition threshold is higher than it should be. Frankly, I?d be fine with a flat 30 signatories from 30 different individuals representing 30 separate member organizations as a valid petition threshold. >> Shouldn?t at least the petition signature process be open to all members and not just general members? > > As we?ve discovered in the past, there?s many organizations that simply wish to receive ARIN services and not be bothered with the various aspects of ARIN governance such as nominations, elections and petitions. A desire not to be bothered with it isn?t something ARIN should be enforcing upon them. I see no valid reason an organization that doesn?t want to be bothered shouldn?t be allowed to change that decision at will. > Any service member that wishes to participate in ARIN governance can readily do but does pick up a rather light obligation to vote at least once every three years to maintain that right ? and an organization that fails to do so only loses that right to be a general member for the coming year. Which doesn?t sound overly burdensome, but strikes me as an entirely unnecessary concept. > If an organization wishes to participate an upcoming election, it simply needs to opt into general membership (including assigning a voting contact) before the list of eligible voters for the election is set ? this happens approximately 45 days before the election (and is an existing requirement today or those who wish to support a petition; one must be an eligible voter for the election in order to participate in the petition process.) I think you are making my point? the petition process should be more open in the future, not less. I?m not saying that the current process is entirely OK. I?m saying that we need a more open process than today, not less. Owen From jcurran at arin.net Sat Oct 30 19:00:39 2021 From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2021 23:00:39 +0000 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: <29633FDD-DA0B-45B0-8B76-5C314C6777DC@delong.com> References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <39F807BF-9924-4D20-BAB9-B6CC9B920764@delong.com> <29633FDD-DA0B-45B0-8B76-5C314C6777DC@delong.com> Message-ID: On 30 Oct 2021, at 5:22 PM, Owen DeLong > wrote:. While I admit my perspective may be jaded by the fact that I oppose the entire concept of service members, if you must disenfranchise voters at the ballot box, I don?t think that disenfranchisement needs to preclude them from the nominating or petition process. Presently it is only general members that are allowed to make nominations or support petitions - we have bylaw language that makes it so, and those who want to participate in ARIN governance should avail themselves of the ability to become general members ? doubly so if they believe that may wish to make a nomination or participate in a petition. Personally, I still think that the petition threshold is higher than it should be. Frankly, I?d be fine with a flat 30 signatories from 30 different individuals representing 30 separate member organizations as a valid petition threshold. We cannot penalize organizations that happen to have the same individual as voting contact (by not allowing their ballot to be counted as support of a petitioner), so it would be more useful to understand the lowest reasonable petition threshold under such circumstances ? do you feel that the value 100 as specified in the proposed bylaw change is too high? Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mike at iptrading.com Sat Oct 30 21:56:40 2021 From: mike at iptrading.com (Mike Burns) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2021 21:56:40 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <39F807BF-9924-4D20-BAB9-B6CC9B920764@delong.com> <29633FDD-DA0B-45B0-8B76-5C314C6777DC@delong.com> Message-ID: <17cd4102681.1267870a42916486.8209372260478577524@iptrading.com> Hi John, I think the number of petitions is too high, zero sounds good to me. But then I'm jaded because I don't believe the NomCom should have the right to exclude qualified candidates at all. In RIPE, it takes 5 members to nominate, and there are no rejections to be petitioned. Candidates declare that they haven't committed fraud or financial misconduct and will abide by the published Code of Conduct. No cigar-filled rooms. Regards, Mike ---- On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 19:00:39 -0400 John Curran wrote ---- On 30 Oct 2021, at 5:22 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:. While I admit my perspective may be jaded by the fact that I oppose the entire concept of service members, if you must disenfranchise voters at the ballot box, I don?t think that disenfranchisement needs to preclude them from the nominating or petition process. Presently it is only general members that are allowed to make nominations or support petitions - we have bylaw language that makes it so, and those who want to participate in ARIN governance should avail themselves of the ability to become general members ? doubly so if they believe that may wish to make a nomination or participate in a petition.? Personally, I still think that the petition threshold is higher than it should be. Frankly, I?d be fine with a flat 30 signatories from 30 different individuals representing 30 separate member organizations as a valid petition threshold. We cannot penalize organizations that happen to have the same individual as voting contact (by not allowing their ballot to be counted as support of a petitioner), so it would be more useful to understand the lowest reasonable petition threshold under such circumstances ? do you feel that the value 100 as specified in the proposed bylaw change is too high? Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers _______________________________________________ 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: https://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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Sun Oct 31 14:53:22 2021 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2021 11:53:22 -0700 Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re=3A_=5BARIN-consult=5D__=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Cons?= =?utf-8?Q?ultation_2021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s__Membership?= =?utf-8?Q?_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <39F807BF-9924-4D20-BAB9-B6CC9B920764@delong.com> <29633FDD-DA0B-45B0-8B76-5C314C6777DC@delong.com> Message-ID: > On Oct 30, 2021, at 16:00 , John Curran wrote: > > On 30 Oct 2021, at 5:22 PM, Owen DeLong > wrote:. >> >> While I admit my perspective may be jaded by the fact that I oppose the entire concept of service members, >> if you must disenfranchise voters at the ballot box, I don?t think that disenfranchisement needs to preclude >> them from the nominating or petition process. > > Presently it is only general members that are allowed to make nominations or support petitions - we have bylaw language that makes it so, and those who want to participate in ARIN governance should avail themselves of the ability to become general members ? doubly so if they believe that may wish to make a nomination or participate in a petition. The point of my statement above is that I believe this should change if we are to proceed with the current proposed bylaw update. I?m well aware of the present rules, but you (and the board) have proposed changes to those rules. If we are to adopt them, then it is my opinion that eligibility to make nominations and sign petitions should be expanded as a safety valve against some of the likely (hopefully unintended) consequences that I foresee from the proposed change. So, yes, your description of the current rules is accurate, but since what we are talking about in this thread is a proposal to change those rules, I?m proposing additional changes that I think are necessary to make the proposal a little less unpalatable. Specifically, I propose that if we are going to make this change, we should: 1. Allow ANY validated person POC from ANY member organization to submit a nomination. 2. Allow ANY validated person POC from ANY member organization to act as signatory to a petition. If we adopt those two changes (which I would, frankly, support with or without the current proposal), then to preserve the integrity of the petition process, we should further require the signatories to be different individuals from different organizations. I would further support setting the petition threshold at a (lower) fixed number and eliminating the percentage requirement. As a straw-man, I propose 30, but I would be open to a number as high as 75 or as low as 20. Under the current (and under the boards proposal), the threshold to get a nomination by petition is currently higher than the sum of the thresholds required to move a policy from zero to a request for board ratification (10 to get draft policy status, 15 to get recommended draft status, 20 to get to last call and then 25 to get to the board for a total of 70 required signatures from zero to last call, and each required group may include members of the prior group). Since we?re talking about a petition to be allowed onto the slate of candidates, not a petition to be seated in an elected body, I really don?t seen a need to limit participation so narrowly. >> Personally, I still think that the petition threshold is higher than it should be. Frankly, I?d be fine with a flat 30 signatories >> from 30 different individuals representing 30 separate member organizations as a valid petition threshold. > > We cannot penalize organizations that happen to have the same individual as voting contact (by not allowing their ballot to be counted as support of a petitioner), so it would be more useful to understand the lowest reasonable petition threshold under such circumstances ? do you feel that the value 100 as specified in the proposed bylaw change is too high? Nor would I want to. I believe I have clarified my intent above in a way that should obviate this concern. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcr at sandelman.ca Sun Oct 31 15:56:19 2021 From: mcr at sandelman.ca (Michael Richardson) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2021 15:56:19 -0400 Subject: [ARIN-consult] =?utf-8?q?=5Barin-announce=5D_ACSP_Consultation_2?= =?utf-8?q?021=2E5=3A_Consultation_on_ARIN=E2=80=99s_Membership_Structure?= In-Reply-To: References: <9AF02FF8-DA3E-42EF-82FD-7D58AAE5304D@arin.net> <08a301d7cc3f$9bf1f3d0$d3d5db70$@iptrading.com> <3B0AA6CA-62C6-4CF1-98B2-E8E0DCF76DF7@arin.net> <39F807BF-9924-4D20-BAB9-B6CC9B920764@delong.com> <29633FDD-DA0B-45B0-8B76-5C314C6777DC@delong.com> Message-ID: <9061.1635710179@localhost> As it's in the middle of an election cycle. Apparently we can't propose the right changes during the cycle. It seems to me that the correct result is to defer drawing any conclusions until the end of the cycle. (My opinion is that fixing the quorum requirements would be better than this process of disenfranchisement) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 487 bytes Desc: not available URL: