[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16

Fri Jan 15 16:17:11 EST 2021

Hi Fernando,

You keep saying this proposal doesn’t have community support and that is plain wrong, and getting more wrong daily.

It had and has community support, and it had majority AC support, just not supermajority.

So your arguments about lack of community support are not applicable, as apparently this decision came down to a few people on the AC at the time.

Maybe your default position for new posters is they probably visited a website for free beers and should be grilled.

Have  you seen the signatures and job titles being posted, even including ARIN membership numbers?

Do you have an ARIN membership number? 

Can we see your papers to ensure  you aren’t getting free beer and can be “dismissed”?

Do you see how objectionable this stuff is, and where it can lead?

None of that matters, as we are not judging this policy by motivations nor by popularity.

But the petition process demands numbers, pure numbers, and postings in support of the petition don’t require the same depth of arguments in support of the underlying proposal anyway, as you yourself pointed out! The process virtually requires the sort of postings we are seeing, or does the number 25 require 25 separate reasoning discussions?

The Trustees have heard the arguments by now I am sure, and the support of the petition must be at or near the required 25 by now.

Unsolicited advice to new posters on how to run their networks and the need to use IPv6 are a waste of time, and are the correct way to keep the community tiny.

Regards,
Mike

PS If we have reached 25 petitions, please let us know. Somebody must be counting. 

From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of Fernando Frediani
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 3:34 PM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16

Yes we are, mainly when there are tentatives to push something that hasn't been broadly accepted by the community as many other proposals that didn't progress.

If a proposal doesn't reach consensus is probably because it didn't resolve all the possible issues it had during the discussion period regardless of how many people supported it.

And by the way: there are absolutely nothing wrong in dismissing supports when they have no substantial justifications to contribute to resolve the opened issues. That's what is evaluated by the AC.
Otherwise we may end up having supports to proposals "because once the person visited the author's company and they give free beers to visitors".

Process keep being bottom-up, everyone is free to write whatever opinion they have and others that don't agree with it or don't consider that as something that resolves opened issues have also the right to contradict them. 

Fernando

On 15/01/2021 17:21, Mike Burns wrote:

Count me as embarrassed at the treatment of new posters on this list.

Demeaned as recipients of payments for expressing their opinion, mocked for offering support without establishing bona fides.

Dismissed because no reasoning is provided in support of their opinions.

And finally attacked when they do.

I hope the Trustees who will make this decision are aware of the importance of bottom-up, stakeholder governance, and realize these numerous expressions of support might be the first steps of these posters towards the kind of ongoing community participation we claim to value. 

Aren’t we all sick of the same voices?

Regards,
Mike Burns

PS ARIN does not require resource holders use NAT, much less CGNAT. 

If you feel that should be a requirement, write a policy proposal.

From: ARIN-PPML  <mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of Robert Clarke
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 2:55 PM
To: Jay Wendelin  <mailto:jmw at poweredbystl.com> <jmw at poweredbystl.com>
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net> 
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16

Isn't this like saying "please give me free land so I can lease it onto schools and other noble public institutions?" 

I don't feel like this argument has weight nor does your business take priority over the actual non profit businesses that won't get allocations because of this policy.

Regards,

Robert

On Jan 15, 2021, at 8:29 AM, Jay Wendelin <jmw at poweredbystl.com <mailto:jmw at poweredbystl.com> > wrote:

I support this petition, I have many Public School Clients that rely on their ISP’s to manage and offer IP address. 

_______________________________________________
ARIN-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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net>  if you experience any issues.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20210115/79bed0be/attachment.htm>