[arin-discuss] [ppml] Counsel statement on Legacy assignments?

[Dean Anderson]

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, Howard, W. Lee wrote:

> Dean said, regarding ARIN's support of NANOG:
> 
> > It is a quite limited interaction, benefiting a very small 
> > number of ISPs. Its is unfair to the vast bulk of other ISPs 
> > who don't participate in Nanog.
> > 
> > You didn't address why you gave such a comparatively large 
> > amount to such a small organization.
> 
> I have been reminded that the original intent was to support the RADB,
> which was supported by the community.  Later, the intent changed to
> support webcasting meetings, so ARIN community members could
> participate.

RADB is a Merit project. RADB is not Nanog and has nothing to do with
Nanog. So are you telling me that you meant to give $50,000 to Merit,
but mistakenly gave it to Nanog instead?  If so, then it seems you
should get the funds back from Nanog, and give them to Merit for the
RADB project.

> It seems to me that the benefits of having a forum for Internet
> operators is of enormous community benefit.

Nanog doesn't provide such a forum.  There have been some attempts at
reforming Nanog. Look for nanog-reform.org on the wayback machine. I
have a copy, if you can't find it.

Possibly having an open forum would be a good thing. PPML seems to serve
that purpose better than Nanog.

> > > More people go to NANOG than ARIN.  When we have joint meetings,
> > > we get more attendees at the ARIN meeting, and more of them are
> > > attending for the first time.
> > 
> > And how many of those people are likely to become ARIN members? How
> > many are even the whois contacts for their companies?
> 
> ARIN Public Policy meetings are for the public.  They are open to
> everyone.

But 'everyone' isn't in the interest of ARIN spending its funds. ARIN
funds have to go to a specific ARIN purpose.  Nanog isn't open to
everyone, anyway. Nanog also gets more meeting attendees from ARIN.
Further, if the benefit to ARIN is increased fees from meeting
attendance, then that is far outweighed by giving $50,000 to Nanog.
Nanog is the net beneficiary, not ARIN. This dubious at best. I wonder
if this isn't an improper scheme to transfer ARIN assets to Nanog.

> > > Most people who attend the ARIN meeting or both meetings tell us
> > > that they like having joint meetings.
> > 
> > I'm sure the Nanog people say that. Nanog attendence has
> > dramatically increased after joint meetings with ARIN.
> 
> I was referring to statistics reported by ARIN's Member Services, and
> the participant feedback we get after ARIN meetings.

There is (obviously) some overlap between ARIN attendees and Nanog
attendees.  My point is that this group probably reports more favorable
feedback about Nanog, than do the rest of ARIN members.

> > > We don't hold both ARIN meetings jointly with NANOG.  We can run
> > > joint meetings with other organizations, if you (the community)
> > > and they (the other organization) wish.
> > 
> > I'll see what I can arrange. I can arrange a lot more if you'll
> > donate $50,000 to other organizations as well.
>
> Make a case to the community and Board.

What case did Nanog make to the community and Board?

> We're not a charity, but we do support the advancement of the Internet
> through information and educational outreach.

The objective facts show that Nanog has been involved in deception and
disinformation campaigns, which seems to disqualify Nanog from
"information and educational outreach" See
http://www.iadl.org/nanog/nanog-story.html
		--Dean


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