[arin-discuss] Participation, nominations, and elections

Scott Leibrand scottleibrand at gmail.com
Fri Jul 24 14:20:18 EDT 2009


Good point, John, and timely: nominations for the Board, AC, and NRO 
Number Council open next week, on July 27th.

https://www.arin.net/participate/elections/elec_calendar.html

We can use all the qualified nominees we can get.

For the AC in particular, here's the details on nominees:

https://www.arin.net/participate/elections/ac.html#acreqmts

Thanks,
Scott

John Brown wrote:
> Actually what the small ISP's need to do is to place people on the AC
> and on the BoT.
>
> Find people within the small guy world that have clue and get them
> nominated and then get them elected to the BoT and or the AC.  (note
> well, I believe that the BoT and AC have generally done a good job.)
>
> Internet governance is a "stakeholder" (ducking now) driven process.  So
> if you give a darn, you have to participate in a meaning full manner.
> And be willing to invest in your time for the betterment of the entire
> community.
>
>
>
>   
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net 
>> [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of VAUGHN 
>> THURMAN - SWIFT SYSTEMS INC
>> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 10:41 AM
>> To: arin-discuss at arin.net
>> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Good Stewardship by example,I'd 
>> like to RETURN a /20
>>
>> I agree.  There are plenty of good operations doing a few 
>> million a year in sales who seriously cannot afford the 
>> combined travel costs and lost time of key staff. Sending the 
>> receptionist doesn't do much good.  I really feel like the 
>> small ISP's need to band up, share expenses and delegate/hire 
>> a competent and loyal representative.
>>
>>   
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John Brown [mailto:john at citylinkfiber.com]
>> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 12:37 PM
>> To: VAUGHN THURMAN - SWIFT SYSTEMS INC; Owen DeLong
>> Cc: arin-discuss at arin.net
>> Subject: RE: [arin-discuss] Good Stewardship by example,I'd 
>> like to RETURN a /20
>>
>> When I was on the ARIN AC once upon a time, I often mentioned 
>> that the small guy wasn't considered as much as ARIN should 
>> be.  I was told that I was incorrect.  Hmm, I still think the 
>> small ISP, rural ISP is still overlooked.
>>
>> The small rural ISP doesn't have the time, or in many cases 
>> the money to
>> fly and attend a ARIN meeting in some "expensive" city.   I had hoped
>> that more local out-reach could be done with local meetings.  
>>
>> Associating ARIN meetings with NANOG meetings, while 
>> generally a good idea, also doesn't solve the issue for the 
>> small guy.  Must small ISP's don't attend NANOG either, for 
>> much the same reasons.
>>
>> This creates an impression that personal participation in 
>> ARIN is limited to the "BIG Guys", those that can afford to 
>> spend $1500 or more in travel and other costs to attend an 
>> ARIN meeting.
>>
>> As has been mentioned many a time on this and other lists, 
>> participation is key.  Whinning is non-productive, 
>> constructive suggestions are productive.
>>
>> There is also an educational ramp up issue to look at.  Many 
>> of those on this list have been involved with netops for 
>> decades, many of the questions have been asked and answered 
>> before, newer people now getting involved will ask those 
>> questions again.  It may be useful for the AC to work on a 
>> list of "common" questions for the website.
>>
>> 1. Why can or can't ARIN just make XXX return their space.
>> 	Pre ARIN      allocated
>> 	Pre InterNIC  allocated
>>
>> Etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> In general the community needs to keep an open mind to the 
>> questions that come forward.  There could be good ideas in there.
>>
>> A detailed look at the space, and really what is in use vs 
>> allocated needs to be conducted.
>>
>>
>> With respects to IPv6.  Bottom line.  That train is coming to 
>> town, get your depot built and ready to receive the cargo, or 
>> be by-passed.  The fact that your provider doesn't have it 
>> yet is an invalid excuse.  Get it working internally, use a 
>> tunnel broker, but get it working.  Then BUG THE HECK out of 
>> your providers sales guy every other week.  They will get the 
>> message. 
>>
>>     
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net
>>> [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of VAUGHN 
>>>       
>> THURMAN - 
>>     
>>> SWIFT SYSTEMS INC
>>> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 10:08 AM
>>> To: 'Owen DeLong'
>>> Cc: arin-discuss at arin.net
>>> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Good Stewardship by example,I'd like to 
>>> RETURN a /20
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> _______________________________________________
>> ARIN-Discuss
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to 
>> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>>
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>   



More information about the ARIN-discuss mailing list