[arin-ppml] IP Address Policy

[Jimmy Hess]

On 8/8/12, Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com> wrote:
> fact that the CEO & Board of Directors tries to listen to the community is
> of course positive but they have absolutely no legal requirement to do so.
So you say, but it would be incorrect.

> They are a US corporation of whatever flavor and as such are actually bound
> by the corporate laws of the United States.  The CEO and board have a
There are certain  US laws ARIN have to follow, with regards to their
activities in the US.
There are certain rights that ARIN has due to being a person in the US.

There are certain global policies and other policies and RFCs that
ARIN has to adhere to.

Not all rules ARIN must adhere to are necessarily "legally" imposed
requirements;
they may be restricted from certain actions for technical reasons, or
specifications
not existing, for example,  allocating IPs from Class E space.

> fiduciary responsibility just like any corporation.  It is their duty to
> honor that responsibility or they should not hold office.  If there are

Those people have fiduciary responsibilities, but one of those
fiduciary responsibilities is to
implement consensus-established policies,  follow their bylaws, and do
what they are telling their members that they are doing.

It could be a fiduciary breach to tell the ARIN membership that they
implement this particular consensus-driven policy  and then fail to do
so in practice when pressed about it.

The ARIN staff are not empowered to arbitrarily bypass policy,  based
on merely an applicant's opinion about the policy's appropriateness.

> It is pretty clear to me that they are doing the opposite of their mission
> in this instance.  It does not destroy any trust if they do what they are

Their mission says "Applying the principles of stewardship, ARIN, a
nonprofit corporation, allocates Internet Protocol resources; develops
consensus-based policies; and facilitates the advancement of the
Internet through information and educational outreach."

So in this instance, they are applying principles of stewarship
(resource conservation),
and implementation of  the consensus-based policy that was put in place.


You are free to disagree with the policy,  and propose changes, to be
made in the future, or look for other options available under the
policy.

As you pointed out,  the CEO has fiduciary responsibilities.
Therefore the CEO is not really free to simply bypass the established
policy  based on an opinion  that it is denying an otherwise
reasonable request.

> Upstream does not meet our competitive needs.  If this community does not

There's nothing in the ARIN mission statement, Global policies, or
RFCs that ARIN follows
which discusses ensuring applicants meet their competitive needs.

--
-JH