[arin-discuss] Good Stewardship by example, I'd like to RETURN a /20

[VAUGHN THURMAN - SWIFT SYSTEMS INC]

Thanks for fleshing that out Owen.

 

I think the issue is that small ISP's (overworked and often overwhelmed)
have not been paying attention.

 

I think the "community" is being represented by a subset that seems to have
(opinion here, not asserting as fact) been under-representing the small
ISP's, which by the way make up the bulk of the community - the silent
majority in fact.

 

I hope I am not the only part of the sleeping bear that has been awakened,
but believe we are paying more attention now.  You might not be so lonely on
that stance should it come up again.

 

~Vaughn

 

From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen at delong.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 11:15 AM
To: VAUGHN THURMAN - SWIFT SYSTEMS INC
Cc: arin-discuss at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Good Stewardship by example, I'd like to RETURN
a /20

 


PS.  I also just learned (from an offline conversation, quote below) that
ARIN recently set a policy to allow the selling of IP space (paid transfers)
between organizations.  Does this seem counter to good stewardship in a time
of impending depletion?  If I have my head on straight, this is a pretty
kind act towards those same early/big assignment holders, isn't it?

 

You say "ARIN recently set" as if ARIN was some third party setting policy

independent of input from the membership or the community.

 

While the policy proposals in question took a tortured and circuitous route

to adoption, it was definitely done with community input and support

throughout the process.

 

It is a matter of record that I was the only dissenting voice in passing

policy proposal 2009-1, and, that I did so strictly because I felt that the

community's interests were not represented in the removal of the sunset

clause. Given the lack of support for subsequently restoring the sunset

clause both in the AC and apparently on PPML, I can only conclude

that my belief the community wanted the sunset clause may well have

been incorrect.

 

While I remain unconvinced that a liberalized transfer policy is good

policy, I am convinced that of the community which was participating

in policy development at the time the issue was being considered, there

was/is strong support for such a policy.

 

I do not believe the ARIN should adopt bad policy just because there

is strong community support for it.  However, I do believe that if ARIN

(specifically the AC and the BoT) are going to go against strong

community support, then, they should be somewhat certain that the

policy in question is bad policy. I am not sufficiently certain that the

relaxed transfer policy is bad policy.

 

Owen

 

The opinions above are mine and mine alone.  I am not speaking

for the AC and many members of the AC disagree with me on

this subject.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20090724/d3e9d4dc/attachment.html>