[arin-ppml] Future pressures on the ARIN policy process (Was: Use of "reserved" address space)

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Thu Jul 1 15:34:03 EDT 2010

On Jul 1, 2010, at 8:17 AM, William Herrin wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 6:21 AM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>> I have the statistics from the time of the membership change
>> (Dec 2009) and can provide those numbers to help clarify:
>>   Approximately 3450 Members who were ISPs
>>   Approximately   20 Members who were End-Users (with an additional
>>                      1440 End-User organizations with RSA who have
>>                      had not opted for membership at that time)
> Putting these numbers in perspective:
> 3450 non-trivial ISPs in the ARIN region, all eligible to vote on who
> sits on the AC or board
> 20 non-ISPs in the ARIN region eligible to vote on who sites on the AC or board.
> Unknown number of organizations with non-trivial address holdings (/27
> or larger). either directly from ARIN or via their ISP in the ARIN
> region  Lower bound likely to be at least 100,000.
> Non-ISP interests represented during board and AC elections: fraction
> of a percent and not a large fraction.
While you make this accusation, I can point to several members of the board
and AC who are not employed by ISPs. I, myself, was not employed by an ISP
when I was elected.

I think that the balance on PPML and at the public policy meetings is somewhat
different from this voting block as you characterize it as well. 

I would like to see the AC elected by a broader community, but, I don't think that
the current process is particularly under-representing end users.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list