[arin-ppml] ARIN-2012-3: ASN Transfers - Last Call

David Farmer farmer at umn.edu
Tue May 8 09:27:25 EDT 2012

On 5/7/12 20:25 CDT, William Herrin wrote:
> On 5/7/12, Owen DeLong<owen at delong.com>  wrote:
>> On May 7, 2012, at 2:29 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>>> If you want the community to own the policies then a non-trivial
>>> amount of dissent means you keep discussing it. That's the nature of
>>> consensus and if you want the disparate members of the community to
>>> engage as ARIN's partners in address management, that's what it takes.
>> While having true consensus would be ideal, it's not always feasible.
>> In some cases, the AC has to weigh whether failing to move a proposal
>> with significant support forward would do a greater harm than continuing
>> to discuss it.
> Hi Owen,
> Would failing to move an AS transfer proposal forward this cycle do
> harm? We've survived without one for 15 years and we're not sort of AS
> numbers, at least not the 32 bit variety.


You and others have mostly convinced me that we should hold off and 
bring this one back to the next policy meeting.  However, I have a fear 
that we are going to be right back where we are today in 5 to 6 months 
after the Dallas PPM.  I really don't want to repeat what happened with 
IPv4 transfers, were the more we discussed this issue the more the 
community polarized and fractured.

How does the community come to a stronger consensus one way or the 
other?  There are really only a few minor tweaks that have been proposed 
to the text and no one has said that those change would fundamentally 
change their support one way or the other.  So, I don't think here are 
changes to the text that will significantly change the consensus.

This is a major change and I think most everyone agrees that it is, this 
is why I believe it is OK to take a little more time. You are right, 
there should be no rush to make this change.  However, how does the 
community use the extra time you are advocating for in a constructive 
manner?  How does the community develop a stronger consensus one way or 
the other?  Is more time going to accomplish that?

If my fears are correct and we don't succeed in producing a stronger 
consensus either way, would you advocate a third policy cycle?  Is the 
dissent strong enough and significant enough to block this proposal, 
even though it seems that a strong majority supports the proposal?

John is right consensus isn't unanimity; I've been doing some reading on 
consensus based decision making, paradoxically, dissent is part of a 
healthy consensus.
The lack of dissent can be "evidence of intimidation, lack of 
imagination, lack of courage, failure to include all voices, or 
deliberate exclusion of the contrary views," rather than actual consensus.


David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota	
2218 University Ave SE	    Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list