[arin-ppml] Against 2013-4

[David Miller]

On 6/4/2013 11:52 AM, Steven Ryerse wrote:
> My vote is against. 
> 
>  
> 
> I think that saying that the “vocal” community fairly represents the
> entire ARIN community is presumptuous at best.  I’m just pulling up the
> /8 allocation holders again and I would ask: 
> 
>  
> 
> GE has a /8 – what do they think about this? – I’ve never seen a post
> from a GE email address in this forum.   How about AT&T – what do they
> think?  I don’t have a clue from reading posts in this forum.  How about
> Xerox or Apple or Ford or Halliburton.  They all have /8’s.  I can’t
> recall seeing any emails from any of those allocation holders either. 
> And of course there are many more /8 holders I’ve not mentioned.  Then
> add all of the Legacy holders and all of the allocation holders that
> have received allocations since ARIN was created - and it is a very very
> slim percentage of all of the ARIN stakeholders who ever comment in this
> forum. 
> 
>  
> 
> Who out there knows what all of these stakeholder think?  I don’t think
> anybody knows.  So to make comments in this forum that presupposes that
> this entire community feels one way or another is inaccurate because
> nobody really knows. 
> 
>  
> 
> Of course we could ask everyone in the ARIN community to comment. 
> 
>  
> 
> And before anyone says that they could comment if they wish, I don’t see
> anywhere in my Legacy paperwork that says I(they) have to participate in
> this community to be a stakeholder.  This community needs to be open
> minded and not closed minded - and it needs to take into consideration
> all ARIN stakeholders and not just the ones that decide to comment. 

You are conflating the "community" and "stakeholders".  Those who hold
number resources are stakeholders - i.e. "a person or group that has an
investment, share, or interest in something".  Stakeholders are not
required to participate in the ARIN community.  ARIN makes decisions
based on community input.  This is not new.  Thus stakeholders who
decide not to participate in the community risk their viewpoints not
being heard.  This is not new either.

As far as I can tell, ARIN invites voting, meeting attendance, and input
from all stakeholders at every turn.

> Free markets with reasonable governance always work.

Absolute statements are almost always wrong.

No, free markets do not do not always work.  We have public fire
departments because private (free market) fire departments failed
miserably.  Society decided that there was a public good in putting out
fires.

We could discuss what "reasonable governance" is forever and never reach
consensus.

> Central planning and control always fails and always provides uneven results.
> Needs based testing is central planning!  The current policies are
producing
> uneven results.

Central planning and control does not always fail.  It doesn't always
work either.  In many cases it depends on the scope of what exactly is
being controlled.

We could discuss what "uneven results" are forever and never reach
consensus.

> It is time to halt the current needs based allocations. 

I disagree.

> 
> /Steven L Ryerse/
> 
> /President/
> 
> /100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA  30338/
> 
> /770.656.1460 - Cell/
> 
> /770.399.9099 - Office/
> 
> /770.392-0076 - Fax/
> 
>  
> 
> Description: Description: Description: Eclipse Networks
> Logo_small.png℠Eclipse Networks, Inc.
> 
> ^        Conquering Complex Networks ^℠ ^
> 
>  
> 
> *From:*arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net]
> *On Behalf Of *Blake Dunlap
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 04, 2013 11:26 AM
> *To:* Kevin Kargel
> *Cc:* arin-ppml at arin.net
> *Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Against 2013-4
> 
>  
> 
> Now legitimately, I don't think some or maybe even most of the advocates
> of dropping needs basis are in it for personal gain. There are at least
> a few if not a lot of them that genuinely believe that some version of a
> "free" market is the best solution to directing goods to those who
> should have them. Let's not marginalize them with accusations of self
> profit motivation, it needlessly creates animosity and an us vs them
> attitude.
> 
>  
> 
> -Blake
> 
>  
> 
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Kevin Kargel <kkargel at polartel.com
> <mailto:kkargel at polartel.com>> wrote:
> 
> I for one am a supporter of the needs basis.  As I have said before, if
> we eliminate the needs basis then I want to be first in line to request
> everything that is left.  I am sure there will be quite a queue.
> 
> My perception is that the ARIN community is strongly biased to support
> needs basis and there is a very vocal minority trying to eliminate it so
> that they can create a market they can profit by.  I don't read the
> opposition to needs basis as having anything to do with the good of the
> community, though there have been many mutations of the spin on it to
> try and advertise it that way.
> 
> Kevin
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net>
> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net>]
> On Behalf Of Owen DeLong
> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 10:17 PM
> To: Steven Ryerse
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Against 2013-4
> 
> On Jun 3, 2013, at 12:37 , Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com
> <mailto:SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com>> wrote:
> 
>> I take issue with the assumption that "this community" is strongly for
> needs based assignments.  Certainly there are folks in this community
> who frequently and sometimes loudly voice their support for needs based
> assignment policies.  Then of course there are folks in this community
> like me who are vehemently against needs based assignments and I
> certainly have voiced that frequently and sometimes loudly.  There have
> been others who have done so as well from time to time.
> 
> It is not an assumption. It is reflected in the numbers each time this
> question has been raised in a public policy meeting throughout ARIN's
> history.
> 
> Owen
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
> Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net <mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience
> any issues.
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net
> <mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience
> any issues.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>