[arin-ppml] ARIN Board consideration of IAB consultationresponse on 2011-5
owen at delong.com
Fri Jul 8 09:48:48 EDT 2011
On Jul 7, 2011, at 7:40 AM, Mike Burns wrote:
>> I want to thank you and the Board. While i still support the intent of 2011-5, I think the Board is correct.
>> David Farmer Email:farmer at umn.edu
> I think we are unfortunately bound to this decision by the MoU and should not subject the idea of Internet self-governance to the stress of feuding organizations at the level of IANA and IETF.
> I'm sure the Board members feel the pressure from the community but made the right decision.
> I also have doubts about 154 for the same reason.
> We engender discord with the IETF.
154 should not engender any discord with IETF, it seeks to have ARIN do what can be done
within their process and continue to work within their process to achieve the desired result.
> We engender discord with APNIC over their transfer policies.
Care to explain how 2011-5 or 154 have anything at all to do with APNIC or their transfer policies?
If you're talking about other proposals, then, one could argue that APNIC's transfer policy has
engendered discord with the other RIRs, since they currently stand alone as the only RIR to
abandon needs-basis in their transfer policy.
> We engender discord with all other registries when we consider regional hoarding policies.
I don't believe that 154 is a regional hoarding policy. Perhaps you are confused with 155?
> All under the rubric of stewardship, or our particular views of stewardship.
> We are stewards not only of addresses and routing tables, but of a unique governance system which requires tolerance and voluntary cooperation to survive.
True. However, such a system of governance can also break down if we do not stand up to
protect fundamental principles. While I realize APNIC has chosen to abandon it, I still believe
that needs basis is a fundamental principle underpinning the management of address
space for the internet. There is a big difference between tolerance of regional differences
and abandonment of fundamental principles simply because one region chose to do so.
> We could be sowing the seeds of escalating problems which could open the door for government to claim the self governance model can not work in lean times.
Fortunately, we are not really facing lean times. We are facing a temporary shortage
of one particular resource which will over time become largely irrelevant.
More information about the ARIN-PPML