[ppml] Markets, pricing, transparency, 2008-2 / 8.3.9

cja@daydream.com packetgrrl at gmail.com
Mon Mar 17 10:39:34 EDT 2008


I have to agree with Owen.  I believe that we even said what is outlined
below on February 7th when the AC sent out a note to ppml.  It included:

" We are aware that this proposal, if adopted, will mark a major change in
ARIN's role in the community and the Internet. While the AC as a whole
believes the policy proposal to be well written and carefully
considered, we are not unanimous in all aspects of the policy proposal,
nor even are we united in the view that the proposed policy should be
adopted. We hope this policy proposal will spark debate and discussion,
and we look forward to getting additional community input on the topic.
 The AC as members of the ARIN community believe in the bottom up
process, and we urge the community to give this proposal the same
consideration and discussion they would give any other proposal."

At the current time I am personally not in favor of this policy as written.
I look forward to the discussion at the meeting and I have been following
closely the discussion on this list.  If after evaluating all the discussion
I feel that this policy is the best thing for the community then I will be
in favor.  The most important thing about this policy proposal and the
reason that I supported writing it.. is that it is essential that the ARIN
community has detailed discussions of this issue and how we as a community
are going to deal with it.

Thanks!
----Cathy



On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 7:56 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

>
> On Mar 17, 2008, at 5:22 AM, <michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >> I think the entire list would appreciate you giving the SEC
> >> angle a rest, as I mentioned to you in private email a couple
> >> of days ago.
> >
> > Let me remind you that this is the PUBLIC policy mailing list, not
> > the ARIN AC's policy mailing list. As a member of the ARIN AC you
> > have no special rights on this list. In fact, as you so graciously
> > pointed out, I gave the issue a rest for a couple of days.
> >
> Well, as a member of the PUBLIC, not just a member of the AC,
> I would also appreciate it if you gave the SEC angle a rest.
>
> > I think that I speak for the entire list in wondering why the
> > ARIN AC, are pushing this transfer proposal so hard?
> >
> I don't believe that the AC is pushing the proposal so hard.
> I believe that one member of the AC is pushing rather hard
> for the proposal. OTOH, I, for one, am somewhere between
> neutral and opposed to the proposal at this point.
>
> I know that there are other members of the AC who are
> also not necessarily in favor of this proposal.
>
> > In the past, the ARIN AC did not attempt to run the public policy
> > process, instead they responded to proposals from others. Something
> > is not right...
> >
> Indeed, the following are not right:
>
> 1.      Assuming that a member of the AC posting to this list
>        is posting as spokesperson for the AC and not as a
>        member of the public is not right.
>
> 2.      Assuming that once elected, members of the AC are
>        not members of the public and have less right to be
>        involved in authoring policy than any other member
>        of the public is not right.
>
> 3.      Regarding a request to stop beating a dead horse as
>        an attempt to "run the public policy process" is also
>        not right.
>
> Just so we're clear here, the above is strictly my personal
> opinion as a member of the public.
>
> As a member of the AC, I will say that there is no official
> AC position in favor of 2008-2, nor is there any official
> AC position against 2008-2.  I am not sure what portion
> of the AC supports or opposes the proposal.  I know
> that during the development process, several of us were
> using the approach of "assume that we need some sort of
> transfer proposal, what's the best one we can come up with."
>
> The AC has not held significant discussion about whether
> or not a such a transfer proposal is something we actually
> want.
>
> Finally, this proposal is a response to requests from others.
> Among others, it is a response to the ARIN Board of
> Trustees.
>
> Owen
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
> Public Policy
> Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml
> Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you
> experience any issues.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20080317/0e0f4a0f/attachment.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list