[arin-discuss] Good Stewardship by example, I'd like to RETURN a /20
Owen DeLong
owen at delong.com
Fri Jul 24 16:30:11 EDT 2009
Designated Member Representative is the person at an ARIN member
organization
who is designated to vote in ARIN elections.
There is no voting directly on policy matters. Instead, the Advisory
Council evaluates
feedback from the community in a variety of fora, including, but not
limited to:
PPML
Meetings
Remote Participation at Meetings
If the advisory council determines that a policy proposal is good
policy and that there
is community consensus around the proposal, then, we recommend it for
adoption
to the Board of Trustees.
The Board, upon receiving such a recommendation from the AC reviews
the policy
to confirm that the ARIN Policy Development Process was properly
followed and
that the policy would not be a violation of the Boards fiduciary
duties to the membership
of the organization. If the board finds that those two conditions are
met, they
ratify the policy and staff implements it.
This is a summary from memory, so, I apologize if it contains any
mistakes on the
details, but, I think it is a reasonably accurate overview of the
process.
Bottom line is that you can't designate a proxy, but, you CAN make
your input known
to the process by participating on PPML even if you do not attend a
meeting.
Further, you can attend the meeting through remote participation at
nearly zero
cost if you have an internet connection. It will still cost you
whatever the bandwidth
costs and your time to participate, but, at least it doesn't require a
huge travel
budget and is not a major time commitment (meetings only last 2 days).
Owen
On Jul 24, 2009, at 11:17 AM, VAUGHN THURMAN - SWIFT SYSTEMS INC wrote:
> Hmmm...
>
> Can this be pooled? In other words, could "many of us" designate
> "some of
> us"?
>
> ~V
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Maimon [mailto:jmaimon at chl.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 2:09 PM
> 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
>
> Arin allows for Designated Member Representative
>
> While this will help with election representation, it wont help much
> to
> show consensus for policies.
>
> Joe
>
> VAUGHN THURMAN - SWIFT SYSTEMS INC wrote:
>> 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