[arin-ppml] large vs small?

[lar at mwtcorp.net]

Enough already. This mouse has been miked dry.


  Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm at ipinc.net> wrote:
> Milton L Mueller wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com]
>>>
>>> Oh Please! I have explained to you (on another list) that RIRs do NOT
>>> make policy, the RIR community makes policy. I have explained this to
>>> you many times.
>> 
>> And I have explained to you equally as many times why no social scientist 
>>familiar with policy making processes would ever buy that argument. 
>>Apparently we're talking past each other. Anyway, that debate is not 
>>relevant to my exchanges with Owen, Michael and Ted about fees, so let's 
>>drop it.
>> 
>> My point was that it is difficult to have a coherent and productive 
>>discussion about the appropriate level
> > of fees to be charged for IP address blocks when, for reasons that I 
> can only tag as "religious," key figures
> > insist that ARIN fees have nothing to do with access to address blocks.
>> 
> 
> The key figures are not blocking fee discussions BECAUSE of the semantic 
>games your describing.
> 
> The key figures are attempting to block fee discussions simply because
> they don't want to talk about fees, period.  They use the semantic games
> to distract the audience from the real issue - fee fairness.
> 
> If you or I used absolutely proper and correct terminology
> regarding IP allocations the key figures would simply find even more
> ridiculous nonsense to use to distract the audience from having a
> fee discussion.
> 
>> Obviously, if you've been following this thread, I am not the only one who 
>>resists that ideology.
>> 
> 
> Correct.  Notice how the anti-fee-discussion faction continues to
> ignore that fact.
> 
>> The troubles compound when others insist that we can't even talk about 
>>fees here because they don't constitute policy. 
>> 
> 
> Agreed.
> 
>> I am not criticizing ARIN staff, the Board or anything like that. I am 
>>"criticizing" or, more accurately, probing the
> > validity of, a particular viewpoint.
> 
> As have I.
> 
> Here is how ARIN fee discussions go:
> 
> 1) The ARIN Board claims their particular methodology, ie: rule 1, to 
>assess fees is valid
> 
> 2) Subject A calls the validity of rule 1 into question.
> 
> 3) The anti-fee-discussion faction attacks Subject A with a claim that
> fee discussion is out of order and refers Subject A to the suggestion box
> 
> 4) Subject A submits a fee suggestion.
> 
> 5) The ARIN board takes up the suggestion and states it's invalid,
> and directs Subject A back to rule 1
> 
> 
> Repeat until Subject A gets tired and goes away.
> 
>> I find these anomalies quite interesting. And revealing. 
>> 
> 
> I find them interesting but not particularly revealing.  Many of
> the anti-fee-discussion faction work for orgs that would stand to benefit 
>by an overhaul of fees and recognition of what the yearly fees are actually 
>paying for, so they are essentially arguing against their own selfish-self 
>interest.
> 
> I think the real issue is that these folks have regarded fees as
> inviolate for so long that they have ceased thinking about them.
> Since they all work for companies and orgs and none of them own 
>controlling stock in those companies or organizations, it's not their money 
>that's being spent, and they aren't used to questioning
> dollar amounts.
> 
> Bean-counters they ain't.  If they were, Cisco and Juniper probably
> wouldn't exist.
> 
> Ted
> 
> PS  Followups set to arin-discuss since this thread really shouldn't
> have been started in arin-ppml in the first place.
> 
> 
>>> I can also assure you there are
>>> no "altars of non-ownership" that "priests" worship upon in RIR
>>> offices.
>> 
>> Good to know. My experience has been a bit different.
>> 
>>> If you have a policy proposal that is germaine to this
>>> thread (large vs. small), I'd like to hear it.
>> 
>> Stay tuned
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

Larry Ash
Network Administrator
Mountain West Telephone
400 East 1st St.
Casper, WY 82601
Office 307 233-8387