[ppml] RE: [arin-announce] NRO Response to ITU Comments on the Management of Internet Protocol (IP) Addresses

Richard Jimmerson richardj at arin.net
Tue Nov 16 22:29:01 EST 2004


Thank you very much for providing input to the list on this very important

You seem to have some misunderstanding of the Internet Resource Policy
Evaluation Process in the ARIN region.  Please allow me to provide
clarification.  For reference the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation
Process is thoroughly documented and may be found at the following URL:


> The fundamental problem with the policy making structures 
> of organisations such as ARIN and the NRO, is that policy 
> is effectively set by members, ie. organisations or 
> individuals who are making use of IP addresses right now.

This is not the case.  Policies are proposed and discussed by anyone who has
an interest in the management of Internet number resources.  ARIN membership
is not at all a consideration.  Unlike organizations such as the ITU,
membership is not a requirement to participate fully in the policy process.
Interested parties do not have to seek sponsorship from members or ask to be
included in their delegation in order to simply observe the proceeding much
less to be able to say anything.  The ARIN public policy mailing list and
public policy meeting are the venues for policy discussion.  Both venues are
completely open to participation by any individual; including those
affiliated with service providers, enterprises, governments, or any other
stakeholder entity.

> The huge debate and lead time for the acceptance of ARIN 
> policy 2002-3 clearly demonstrated this issue. The people 
> who most stood to benefit from it were NOT ARIN members. Yet 
> the people who influenced the repeated deferral of it 
> and who finally voted to adopt it were mostly existing 
> ARIN members who were acting out of good faith rather then 
> their own interests.

The people who influenced the development of policy 2002-3 were those who
participated in the discussion.  Some of them were ARIN members, others were
not.  Since there is no polling of members on any policy issue, there is no
way to determine how many members or non-members participated in the
discussion.  There was considerable discussion of this policy.  Much of it
was focused on the possible effects that this policy would have on the
routing table.

I would like to call your attention to ARIN policy 2003-15.  ARIN policy
2003-15 and 2002-3 are very similar policies in that both deal with an
allocation size smaller than the minimum allocation size.  The big
difference is that policy 2003-15 applies only to the African portion of the
ARIN region.  It was proposed, supported and adopted in recognition that
only a few providers in Africa could qualify for the minimum allocation; but
more could qualify and thus become independent if the minimum allocation
size was smaller.  In this case the time from proposal to final adoption was
Policy proposal 2003-15 was introduced for discussion on the ARIN public
policy mailing list on September 22, 2003.  Following a review period in
accordance with the policy process it was adopted.  

At the meeting of the ARIN Advisory Council on October 23, 2003 discussion
of the proposal on the public policy mailing list and at the public policy
meeting was noted as they recommended the adoption of the policy proposal to
the ARIN Board of Trustees.  Membership affiliation of the participants was
not a consideration.  This was also the case when the policy was ultimately
adopted at the ARIN Board of Trustees meeting on December 22, 2003.


> Yes, it would have been possible for many non-ISP businesses 
> to become ARIN members and influence this policy by sheer 
> numbers. But how many are even aware of ARIN or know that 
> they can become a member? Mostly they rely on their ISP to 
> handle their Internet-related needs. And so their interests 
> went largely unconsidered in the 2002-3 discussions.

It would have been possible for many non-ISP businesses to influence this
policy (2002-3) by sheer numbers if they only participated.  They did not
have to become members.  In the case of 2003-15 many individuals who were
likely NON-MEMBERS, very many of them from Africa, participated in the
discussion and thus INFLUENCED its adoption.

Outreach to persons and organizations that do not participate in the process
or are not aware of ARIN is a continuous activity on the part of ARIN.  To
that end ARIN conducted a sub-regional meeting in Tanzania in June 2004.
ARIN continues to seek other ways to promote participation and would welcome
any suggestions you may have to achieve this goal.

I would like to say one more time: Membership is not a prerequisite to

Best Regards,

Richard Jimmerson
Director of External Relations
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list