[arin-ppml] IP Address Policy

Steven Ryerse SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com
Thu Aug 9 16:30:25 EDT 2012

It’s funny, there is no vinegar in my first post on this subject but it sure generated some aimed at me!  Based on your reponses I don’t think we disagree on very much.  Obviously I’ve set out to change some hearts and minds and as these seem to be sacred cows I’ve stepped on but so be it.

Steven L Ryerse
100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA  30338
770.656.1460 - Cell
770.399.9099 - Office
770.392-0076 - Fax

[Description: Description: Description: Description: Eclipse Networks Logo_small.png]℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.
        Conquering Complex Networks℠

From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 3:56 PM
To: Steven Ryerse
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IP Address Policy

hello again,
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com<mailto:SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com>> wrote:
With all due respect bad policies need to be changed.  Policy isn't policy as you say when it is bad policy.  Consensus isn't good when it is wrong.  ARIN does actually have an obligation to me and to you and to Microsoft and to every other member of the Internet community in North America.  Their charter is to serve ALL of us and not just SOME of us.  All of us should be on the same level playing field.  The BGP policy is specifically designed to deny Internet resources based on the size of the requesting organization.

This is your perception.  It is designed to aid in the mission of stewardship.

 This is absolutely wrong and it is bad policy!

Arin's mission statement says:  "Applying the principles of stewardship

This is the bit of the mission you seem to be missing.  there is a reason it is the first thing in the mission.

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

This specifically says that one of ARIN's main missions is to Allocate resources.

by applying the principles of stewardship, yes.

 It absolutely does not say that ARIN is supposed to find reasons and ways to deny resources.

nor does it.  You just happened to have run afoul of current policy, which you can try to change.

 It should be finding reasons and ways to approve allocation of resources to everyone who needs them.  To do anything other than allocating resources to organizations who can demonstrate the need for those resources is the exact opposite of ARINs mission.  Each policy should first have to pass the test of: Does this policy completely align with ARINs mission - and does it advance Internet usage?  Any policies that fail this test need to be redone or be removed or not approved - regardless of how well written it might be.

I would be in favor of such a change to the PDP.

I'm sorry that I appear to be ruffling the feathers of some members of the this community but I will keep on saying that in this forum over and over again until some reason prevails that this is wrong and it needs to be fixed.  I am part of this community too.

You are welcome.

I doubt you will find a warm welcome if you keep insisting you  are right and the majority is wrong however.

Everybody wants a pony, few actually get one ;-)

I would also categorically state that ruling by consensus can be dangerous and frequently does NOT result in good policies.  If all of the polices that have been approved to date by consensus are so perfect then why do existing policies have to frequently be modified and fixed?  I will give you a very graphic illustration of how consensus can be used for very bad policies.  In the United States there used to be a very strong consensus in the southern states that black men and women should be enslaved.  The vast majority of southerners had come to a strong consensus that the "policy" of slavery was good for the south and that the "policy" of slavery was good for the economy and that black men and women were only capable of being good slaves.  This consensus was so strong that southerners were willing to die to keep the "policy" of slavery in place.  There was a small minority in the south who stood up and said slavery was wrong.  They were not part of the consensus and of course we all realize today that the "policy" created by the consensus of the majority that slavery was good was very WRONG - and this small minority was RIGHT.  Consensuses have led to big trouble in Communist Russia and Nazi Germany and many other examples.  Thank goodness we are not discussing issues of this magnitude in this community and of course I use these extreme examples to illustrate that governing solely by consensus is not always smart.

Most folk in the places you cite were disenfranchised.  No one is disenfranchised in making Internet resource administration/ditribution policies.  All are welcome, all have an equal voice in this meritocracy.

 The beauty and the power of this Internet Community forum is NOT consensus

We differ in this as well.  I think the beauty of the system IS exactly is ins Bottom-up, transparent, open and consensus based decsion making processes.

- but IS the ability of the Internet Community to have input into what ARIN does.  That is very positive and the obvious reason why the mission statement seeks to give the Internet Community input to its actions.  If the consensus of this community is contrary to ARINs mission then it should always be denied by ARINs board - every time.  That is their fiduciary responsibility!

Many of the responses I have received so far want to debate a particular point of policy or a fine point of my augments but they don't really address my overlying point.  While that kind of dialog is positive, it misses the overlying point I am trying to make that ALL policies need to be FULLY aligned with ARINs mission.

see the stewardship phrase.

 Until we come to agreement that ARIN needs to fully pursue its chartered mission to serve EVERONE who can demonstrate need - at a mission statement level, arguing the various points of a policy at a low level won't help solve the overlying problem.  I am asking for the help of ARIN & this Community to correct the overlying problem first.  I hope you will join me!

You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar, just saying!!


"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20120809/989fff69/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1473 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20120809/989fff69/attachment-0001.jpg>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list