[arin-discuss] Importance of Corporate Governance

[Todd Underwood]

christopher,

On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 09:18:32AM -0500, Christopher Zolla wrote:
> 
> Let me begin by saying I really have no knowledge of what the motivation
> is behind these allegations, 

some of the history matters here, i think.  when the same person
levels unprovable and unproven accusations over years (more than a
decade now?), one stops listening or responding.

> it is based on concern for the organization.  From what I have been
> reading, Dean has raised some valid questions regarding voting and the
> spending of ARIN dollars.  

the voting issue was resolved with a professional response from john
curran proxying an opinion by arin counsel (one of the most respected
law firms in washington, probably the country).  if someone disagrees
with that opinion, they can either file a claim or raise a legal issue
directly to the arin board of directors.  i, personally, am convinced
that dean and his random walk through blacks law dictionary are wrong
and that the actual lawyers for arin are right. you're free to draw
your own conclusions and consult your own lawyer about virginia
corporate governance.  

i, personally, have a lot more interest in discussing the roll-out of
the AAA records in the root, policies around ipv6 allocation and
routing and other issues of actual network policy.

> That being said, from a third party point of view, Dean has maintained a
> positive and professional response to every email I have read (I haven't
> read them all - but close) questioning his motives and his approach to
> this situation.  In my mind, emails like this don't discredit anything
> he is asking.  In fact, I think it has the opposite effect in that the
> more that get sent, the more I really want an official answer to these
> allegations from ARIN.  

which allegations?  the allegations that they are operating a criminal
enterprise?  seriously?  the accusation that paul vixie is a master
international criminal who is actually a spammer?

christopher:  dean has been bandying about these accusations for
years.  tons and tons of smoke but there's *never* any fire.  spend
some time researching it.

i don't know paul vixie personally, but i know enough about him and
know enough about what he's done for the internet (policy and
infrastructure-wise) to know that it is *laughable* to accuse him (or
rodney joffe, for that matter) of being spammers.  anyone who would
make such an allegation and then *never* back it up with any data
loses all credibility.  

> It would seem to me if Dean was spaming us all
> with a "bunch of lies", this issue would already have been addressed
> with the truth and the discussion would be over.  I guess the question I

it has been.  dozens and dozens of times of the years.  dean is
playing the neo-con playbook:  just repeat the same lies and wait
until peopel get tired of correcting them.

> Are the allegations not being taken seriously?

i sincerely hope not.  

> In summary, for all I know Dean _may_ be misguided and have his own
> agenda, but if the things he is saying are false, then present an
> official response and discredit him.  This email is not directed at
> anyone in particular.  I wanted to share my fairly disconnected view on
> the situation and what my perception was as a member who has not been
> actively involved in the workings of ARIN.

i can appreciate that.  one of the things that is going on here is
that so many of us have dean on our personal killfiles and have vowed
to not feed the trolls that he is given free reign to propagate
nonsense on the list without correction.  in general, that's a good
policy.  in this case i believe that some people, such as yourself,
may be left with the mistaken believe that there is something credible
(or nefarious) here, when there is, instead, just a reasonable
decision to mostly ignore someone who has very little credibility.

i think curran has done a fabulous job carefully teasing out any
specific allegations that can be addressed and addressing them.  the
quorum/voting issue is a great example.  dean raise a point, curran
got a legal opinion, the case is now closed.  dean now wants the name
of the individual lawyer who offered that opinion.  why?  who knows?
who cares.  that issue is settled.  anyone who disagrees should use
the policy or board process to change the decision or use the legal
process to file a claim if they feel harmed in some way by it.

there are *lots* of examples of curran directly addressing concrete
claims over the past year or so.  vixie even responded once to the
accusations that somehow it was well-known that he was a spammer
(rather than being well-known as one of the most vehement
anti-spammers out there).

those of us who are active in nanog (which has a conference 3x a year
that draws 400-500 of the brightest network engineers on this content
and which i highly recommend:  www.nanog.org; take a look at the
agenda for the upcoming meeting in san jose later this month) know
that arin's participation is valuable to both organizations.  arin
works on policy, nanog works on operations and engineering.  on most
other continents, these functions are rolled into the same
organization (RIPE, LACNIC, e.g.), but in north america, for
historical reasons, they are separate.  it is incredibly useful for
nanog attendees to be exposed to the policy process at the join
arin/nanog meetings.  it is incredibly useful to arin to be exposed to
the engineering problems created by their policies.  it is also useful
to arin that nanog delivers engineers to attend arin meetings (some of
whom might not attend were it not for the joint meeting).  in short,
nanog/arin working together is good.   anyone who thinks that nanog is
a small club isn't paying attention.  (disclaimer:  i've been going to
nanog for a few years and currently chair the program committee there,
so i'm naturally interested in the organization and proud of what
we've done with it).  

here's what i predict will happen:  dean doesn't know me or know
anything about me but he'll now try to drag me through the mud.  he'll
probably claim that i'm a spammer, murderer, drug dealer international
criminal mastermind who is supporting the devious plan to anycast
annoyance into his life.  who knows?  maybe he'll even sue me.  he
tries to intimidate anyone who disagrees with him.

i'll try to refrain from commenting further on this thread, but i
thought it would be useful for everyone to know just how many clueful
people are ignoring these issues simply because of the (lack of)
credibility of their source.

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
todd underwood                                 +1 603 643 9300 x101
renesys corporation                            general manager babbledog
todd at renesys.com                               http://www.renesys.com/blog


----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
todd underwood                                 +1 603 643 9300 x101
renesys corporation                            general manager babbledog
todd at renesys.com                               http://www.renesys.com/blog