[arin-ppml] Board Rejects "ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation” Due to Scope

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ]

As I've said in my email, this is not about the proposal, it just reminded me that it has been 3 months, since the minutes where publish and they haven't been corrected.

I've already raised this when I saw the minutes for the first time. It is not my fault if the AC has not corrected it, or publicly asked excuses. I was told at that time that the minutes are draft, and will be confirmed later on, even if I explicitly said the same you indicate "how is possible they are draft if it says they have been reviewed".

Actually I'm happy if the minutes are not changed, but it should be publicly acknowledge that they contain false information and that should be somehow attached also to the published minutes.

Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 11/7/19 17:21, "Jimmy Hess" <mysidia at gmail.com> escribió:

    On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 9:03 AM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
    <arin-ppml at arin.net> wrote:
    > Hi all, and specially the AC (as I think a response is required),
    > Reviewing this email, I just realized that the minutes of the 10th April 2019 minutes are still published as originally.
    >
    > There are two points that I've discussed in emails and in person with several AC members, which were clearly false and unappropriated and even one of them (at least in Spain), a criminal act (slander and damage to one's image).
    [snip]
    > 1. "AP stated that at the LACNIC meeting has discussed it and they dismissed it as out of scope".
    > -> This is totally false. Such thing never happened in LACNIC or any other RIR. I think this requires a public correction.
    
    I'm sure your seemingly frivolous allegation of a criminal act by AC members
    will NOT be appreciated by anyone.   If you believe legitimate errors have been
    made,  then I would suggest  you bring up what you have without using
    language that would be considered as poisoning the well.
    
    Anyways, the AC minutes are moot regarding outcome of the policy proposal,
    as the BoT  has looked at it and agreed as the proposal Prop 266 clearly was
    way outside the defined scope according to the ARIN policy development process;
    adjustments to discussion minutes would not mean that a decided action
    is reversed.
    
    I don't actually know whether that is false or not,  but even if
    something brought
    to the discussion turned out to be inaccurate, that does not make the minutes
    themself incorrect  -- the minutes should keep an accurate record of what
    was said/done;   even if something that was said turned out to be an error
    or mistake.
    
    > I talked to Amy Potter (AP), and she confirmed that she never said that,
    
    Oh, really?    Well, you can refer to published AC May minutes  that
    says official
    April minutes were approved as-is without objections,  in other words the
    people in attendance at next meeting would have agreed that the record was
    an accurate representation of what business transpired at that meeting.
    
    I would imagine if the AC were concerned enough about who or what
    exact discussion point was brought up: you would have a published
    statement or special business at their meeting to request an extra
    note in the minutes.
    
    More than 2 months and meetings later is probably a quite inappropriate time
    to suggest  further modification to official records of a proceeding that are
    already approved and finalized;   at this point their meeting participants are
    very likely to have gaps in their personal memories regarding the minute
    details of their discussions, who said what, etc.  A member might not even
    recollect exactly their own words,  unless  they have a recording
    to refer to,  as in, the minutes...
    
    https://www.arin.net/about/welcome/ac/meetings/2019_0516/
    >" “The ARIN Advisory Council approves the Minutes of 10 April 2019, as written.”
    >The Chair called for discussion. There were no comments.
    >The motion carried with no objections."
    
    --
    -JH
    



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.