[arin-discuss] Legacy RSA

[Dean Anderson]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2007, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> >> It is in ARIN's interest to help keep their own meeting costs
> >> affordable for all attenders. 
> >
> >I agree.  So ARIN management has to show that joint meetings reduce
> >ARIN's costs.
> 
> That is NOT what I said.  I said "all attenders" not just ARIN
> employees.

Huh? What do ARIN employees have to do with the joint meeting costs?  
But if ARIN's meeting costs are increased (at the financial benefit of
some members) that's also improper.

> >So far, ARIN's involvement with NANOG has increased those ARIN's
> >costs by $130,000+
> >
> 
> Assuming that is true I see no problem IF the TOTAL costs that were
> spent by ALL attenders were at least $130,000 LOWER as a result of
> attending the joint meetings.
>
> ARIN staff is paid by our dues.  Either we pay more money for double
> hotel rooms/flights/food for our staff that we send to these meetings,
> or we pay slightly more in dues to cover the increased expense to ARIN
> of holding joint meetings.  The smart thing is to pay the lower of the
> two TOTAL costs.  Thus, if ARIN and NANOG hold joint meetings and our
> increased ARIN dues as a result of this are, say $500, but our
> increased costs to send our employee to a separate NANOG meeting would
> be, say, $1000, why then we are stupid to tell ARIN not to hold a
> joint meeting with NANOG.  THAT is what the ARIN mangement needs to
> prove.

That benefits _ONLY_ NANOG members. That is an improper transfer of ARIN
funds when it increases (rather than decreases) ARIN expenses. ARIN
management can't be concerned about NANOG funding. If it helps ARIN
reduce costs, there is an argument. If it costs ARIN more, there isn't.

If it costs a few NANOG members more, that's irrelevant to ARIN.

		--Dean





-- 
Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000