[arin-discuss] Unsubscribe

Fri Jul 24 14:49:45 EDT 2009

Unsubscribe.

Sincerely,
Erik
*************************************

On Jul 24, 2009, at 10:42 AM, "Heidi Dohse" <heidi at nuwave.com> wrote:

> Ok - I hadn't planned to go to the Michigan meeting. I have changed  
> my mind.
>
>
> In the past I have worked for the "Big Guy" with lots of resources.
> Currently I am working with a rural "small guy" provider and I am the
> resource (sad but true).  When I first started, 15 years ago, the IP  
> world
> was pretty much just data traffic. Now the IP world consists of  
> Voice, Data
> and convergent communication networks that deliver it all. The  
> number of IP
> driven end-user devices is just going to keep growing. I guess it  
> will take
> all of us working together so we don't break the network. My company  
> is in
> the process of making sure that we will be IPv6 compatible, but need  
> to
> request additional IPv4 space too.
>
> If I can help be an advocate for small ISPs - though I can't  
> guarantee that
> I have a clue (per the email below :-) - I am willing to be involved.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Heidi Dohse
> NuWave Communications
> heidi at nuwave.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-discuss- 
> bounces at arin.net]
> On Behalf Of John Brown
> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 10:51 AM
> To: VAUGHN THURMAN - SWIFT SYSTEMS INC; arin-discuss at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Good Stewardship by example, I'd like to  
> RETURN
> a /20
>
> 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.