[arin-ppml] Suggestions for PDP improvement
jcurran at arin.net
Thu Nov 10 16:39:35 EST 2011
On Nov 10, 2011, at 4:27 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> Charging a second member-elected body not with shepherding policy
> ideas through the process but instead actively developing it created a
> CONFLICT OF INTEREST which has WRECKED THE CHECKS AND BALANCES. This
> past couple weeks' sorry mess is just the latest example.
We've had an ARIN AC since the very beginning which has
been distinct from the Board but charged with advising
the ARIN Board on number resource policy matters. Are
you asserting that having the ARIN AC both lead the
development and make the recommendations on policies
presents a greater conflict of interest than just their
duty to recommend policies? If you are doing so, and
pointing to 2011-1 as an example, then please let me
know asap (privately if desired) if you feel that any
ARIN AC members are acting out of interests other than
to the ARIN community at large. I have seen absolutely
no evidence of such, and actually see many AC members
which are going out of their way to solicit any and all
input from the community.
> AC members can't "not be" ISP industry experts. And we wouldn't want
> them to if they could. The alternative is what we found in the IRPEP:
> they don't write ARIN policy as a group. Instead, they help
> individuals (including themselves) write and bring forward those
> individual's policy proposals.
You realize that the change occurred intentionally, with the
result being better and clearer policy. I have no objection
to recommend to the ARIN Board changing it back but definitely
want to know that we're solving an actual problem by doing so.
President and CEO
More information about the ARIN-PPML