[arin-ppml] Public Policy meeting agenda
Lee Howard
spiffnolee at yahoo.com
Wed Oct 30 13:28:16 EDT 2024
I hadn't thought about this perspective. At least, not in a while. So, thank you.
I largely agree. I may think my email is just discussing facts and logic, but to someone else it may sound much more intense, haughty, authoritative, or intimidating. It's much easier to defuse that in person, where tone, expression, and body language can convey that. Plus the hallway time meeting people and smiling.
Live communication is faster and denser. It's more efficient than asynchronous text. It's especially helpful for Draft Policies. Unlike Recommended Draft Policies, where the Advisory Council has edited the text and discussed it several times, solicited community input, and received advice from staff and counsel, Draft Policies have had no input yet. I think the AC needs directional guidance on those. "Should we work on this? Which direction should it go? Any issues leap out that we should carefully survey/judge before recommending?" That kind of feedback doesn't necessarily require long-form essays; initial consideration at the meeting is perfect for that.
btw, the parts of the Number Resource Policy Manual (i.e., the policies, a/k/a NRPM) that I know well are ones that come up in my day job, either regularly or recently. Plus, I usually have it open in a tab during the meeting so I can jump up and say, "That's not consistent with section 3.1.4.1.5.9.2.6."
Also, like most fears, imposter syndrome gets easier when you Do The Thing and nothing bad happens.
wrt email versus other forums: I admit to being old, and liking the "push" function of email. I don't have to keep a tab open for it, or try to keep track of which unread messages in which channel are important. I don't like the loss of in-line commenting (I still blame Microsoft), and I think Google makes archives more useful than the archives themselves. But I haven't tried to look for an archive for at least eight years (and that would have been at IETF). If the text isn't clear, I'll Ask ARIN, or ask the AC to add a clarification proposal to their list of things to do.
Lee
On Wednesday, October 30, 2024 at 12:42:15 PM EDT, Adair Thaxton <sthaxton at internet2.edu> wrote:
Perhaps making generalizations about the people you wish to participate
more, is not the best way to encourage their participation.
Posting to the PPML is intimidating. Impostor syndrome is very common in
this industry, and having the ability to have your posts seen by big
name people in our field can be a psychological deterrent. For example,
consider your first "Holy shit, John Freaking Curran just replied to
me!" moment. Nobody wants to say something dumb in front of John
Freaking Curran. Combine that with the occasional combativeness
displayed by some contributors, and it only becomes more intimidating.
I attended my second ARIN last week and was deeply impressed how
thoroughly people like Kevin Blumberg and Lee Howard know NRPM, just
throwing out section numbers and definitions like they have it
memorized. I do not have that level of familiarity with NRPM (maybe by
Charlotte?) but I've always been an "ask questions anyway" person, and
several new attendees have thanked me for asking questions they had as
well but didn't verbalize.
Encouraging participation starts with understanding why people could be
discouraged from participating. This is an opt-in list with a high bar
for what we're asked to understand. The policies and definitions are
specific and exacting, sometimes verging on arcane, and the person
you're replying to may well have 20+ years of historical context that
you don't personally have.
Further, Millennials are fairly well-represented on the ARIN AC -
particularly in an industry where we regularly have to exhort longtime
attendees to please, please, please bring a junior employee with them.
The Fellows program is a great step in encouraging participation from
younger people. Lamenting younger generations' lack of participation is
a disservice to those who jump in with both feet and are invested in
ARIN's mission and future.
I think we could do a better job with providing links to definitions to
things that are terms of art, on both postings on the PPML and on the
draft policies page. I think that maybe using something like Google Docs
(where contributors may Suggest or Comment, but not edit) would be
interesting. I think that asking newer attendees how they best
understand information may be a step in the right direction -
personally, I appreciated that there were a handful of paper policy
booklets available for those of us who prefer to be able to mark up a
copy on our own!
Pipermail archives are available, archived, easy to search, familiar,
and automatically generated... but not necessarily well-presented. Just
because they serve a function doesn't mean that function cannot be improved.
Adair
On 10/30/24 10:13, Fernando Frediani wrote:
> I am on this for a couple of years and still often hear colleagues
> talking about the reasons for low participation on Policy Forums. Some
> blame some discussions are discouraging while other mention email list
> format.
>
> One thing to take in consideration is that these topics are not trivial
> and requires a minimal amount of time and patience dedicated to read,
> understand and write.
> I see that those who don't participate is simply because they don't want
> or don't consider this topic of any priority in their lives and don't
> put up the necessary time.
>
> I think mailing-list continues to be the best method for the discussions
> to happen as it is well established for decades, everything gets
> recorded on both list archives and people's mailboxes and keeps an
> organized record of everything that has happened to be easily consulted
> over time.
> Gen Z and Millennials in general often is seen to resist to email and
> wish to use messaging applications that not only make records go missing
> quiet easily but also reduce the quality of the discussion and taking
> off it important details.
>
> Best regards
> Fernando
>
> On 29/10/2024 13:44, Andrew Dul via ARIN-PPML wrote:
>>
>> In addition to the ability of the community to engage with each other
>> at the public policy meetings, the community has the opportunity to
>> engage with each other in this forum "the PPML."
>>
>> While this forum is open to all who wish to participate, over the
>> years my observation is that the number of people who participate
>> interactively in this forum appears to decline and I hear from various
>> members of the community that they do not participate in the written
>> PPML forum for a number of reasons.
>>
>> We often see the AC shepherds prodding for input only to often see no
>> replies or replies from the same dozen or so participants. This
>> community is much larger than those participants. Over the years, it
>> appears the use of mailing lists has become less comfortable for some
>> community participants. While I understand some of those reasons the
>> fact remains that we are are here to do the public work of developing
>> IP number resource policy and that policy should be carried out in
>> public. If a mailing-list isn't the right method to carry out this
>> public work, then we must figure out what is the right way to continue
>> this work so that IP number resource policy which is developed for the
>> Internet community in the ARIN region is open and reflective of the
>> Internet community that ARIN represents.
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>> On 10/26/24 11:14 AM, Lee Howard via ARIN-PPML wrote:
>>> Top-posting because that's how email has worked for the last 20 years :-(
>>>
>>> There are three kinds of meetings required in the ARIN Bylaws [1]:
>>> * Public Policy /and /Members Meetings (biannual)
>>> * Annual Meeting (annual)
>>>
>>> A strong delineation between meetings is not the only way to achieve
>>> their objectives. But we must prioritize the core objectives. All of
>>> the laudable big tent objectives are secondary.
>>> In my experience, largely supported by the hallway track, people
>>> don't travel thousands of miles to ARIN Public Policy and Members
>>> meetings to hear department reports and updates from external
>>> agencies. We travel because we can get more conversation about
>>> proposals done in person than in months of PPML. It would be great to
>>> hear from others on why they come: respond to the meeting survey
>>> <https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ARIN54>! And/or, join this conversation!
>>>
>>> Again, that is not to say that I'm not interested in the work on
>>> ICP-2 or RPKI or ARIN Online developments: quite the opposite! But I
>>> read the mission statement as a prioritized list:
>>> 1. ARIN supports the operation of the Internet through the management
>>> of Internet number resources throughout its service region;
>>> 2. coordinates the development of policies by the community for the
>>> management of Internet Protocol number resources; and
>>> 3. advances the Internet through informational outreach.
>>> ARIN will continue to utilize an open, transparent multi-stakeholder
>>> process for registry policy development. [2]
>>>
>>> The fact that Hollis and Bill managed the afternoon to get us through
>>> the other ten proposals is amazing. At lunch, we had been through two
>>> of twelve proposals. Based on that rate of progression, nobody
>>> thought we would get through the rest of the draft proposals, and
>>> this was a hot topic in the hallway. So I disagree with you that it
>>> was not an issue: it was a clear issue, and Hollis and Bill were able
>>> to pull us through.
>>>
>>> This isn't the first time we've been tight for time on public policy
>>> discussion; I seem to recall occasions where we had to move
>>> discussion to the list. That almost happened this time, and I think
>>> "How we use attendees' time" especially with regard to public policy
>>> is a significant enough issue to bring it to PPML. If I'm alone among
>>> the community in this concern, I'll settle down.
>>>
>>> Thanks again, and always, for an excellent meeting and for
>>> facilitating robust discussion of issues that are important to the
>>> community.
>>>
>>> Lee
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] "ARIN will hold Public Policy and Members Meetings biannually and
>>> in person when possible. ARIN’s Annual Meeting is held annually and
>>> may coincide with an ARIN Public Policy and Members Meeting. "
>>> https://www.arin.net/about/corporate/bylaws/
>>> Excluding Bylaws about Board and AC meetings.
>>>
>>> [2] https://www.arin.net/about/corporate/bylaws/, Article II, Section 2
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Friday, October 25, 2024 at 10:53:21 AM EDT, John Curran
>>> <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Oct 24, 2024, at 6:36 PM, Lee Howard via ARIN-PPML
>>>> <arin-ppml at arin.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In the spirit of offering constructive feedback, I would like to
>>>> describe what I would like to see at ARIN Public Policy meetings.
>>>>
>>>> Broadly, the purpose of the Public Policy Meetings is to discuss
>>>> policy and policy proposals. The purpose of the Members Meeting is
>>>> to provide the Members with information about the operation of the
>>>> organization, especially as it will help guide governance, including
>>>> elections.
>>>> ...
>>>> I think this organization will better align the work in each meeting
>>>> with the purpose of the meeting.
>>>
>>> Lee -
>>>
>>> Thanks for sending this! I also noted your comment at the
>>> microphone that we should never shortchange public policy
>>> discussions at these meetings—a view that I strongly agree with
>>> (and observed that, thanks to Hollis and Chair Sandiford’s
>>> excellent moderation, this was not an issue yesterday).
>>>
>>> As you are aware, we tended to have a stronger delineation
>>> between the Public Policy Meeting and the Members Meeting in the
>>> past, and it is true that we could organize that way in the future.
>>>
>>> However, I believe there are a few factors to consider before we
>>> commit to a strict delineation –
>>>
>>> 1. In recent years, we’ve been able to “expand the tent” of ARIN
>>> members; in other words, members are no longer limited to
>>> ISPs and large organizations. Due to changes in membership
>>> structure, nearly every customer is now an ARIN member. As
>>> such, those participating in our public policy discussions
>>> are largely ARIN members—individuals from organizations that
>>> pay fees to support ARIN, receive services from ARIN, and can
>>> (if they wish) become general members and participate in
>>> ARIN’s governance.
>>> 2. We are also in an era where ARIN is engaged in many
>>> activities beyond just number resource policy, which have the
>>> potential for significant implications for all of ARIN’s
>>> customers. For example, topics such as the evolution and
>>> deployment of RPKI services, the current ICP-2 update
>>> activities, and our cybersecurity efforts are not public
>>> policy per se, but they have equally significant potential
>>> impacts on ARIN’s customers. As such, these topics deserve to
>>> be informed by feedback from our entire customer community.
>>> 3. Finally, I note that ARIN is committed to capacity
>>> development within the ARIN community—i.e., we aim to improve
>>> the knowledge and experience of our entire community. Over
>>> time, this has proven to help grow our pool of volunteers who
>>> advance to important roles such as the ARIN AC, the ASO AC,
>>> and the ARIN Board of Trustees. Those participating in our
>>> meetings presently gain broad exposure to all aspects of ARIN
>>> – not just number resource policy development – and I do
>>> worry that a strict delineation of the Public Policy Meeting
>>> and the Members Meeting could hinder an important element of
>>> cross-pollination that has historically bolstered leadership
>>> development from within ARIN’s community.
>>>
>>>
>>> To be clear, I am not saying that a clear distinction between the
>>> two aspects of the meeting is no possible, but rather that there
>>> are potential downsides that should be considered and balanced
>>> against any benefits we hope to achieve by such delineation.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> /John
>>>
>>> John Curran
>>> President and CEO
>>> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ARIN-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:
>>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>>> Please contactinfo at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ARIN-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:
>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contactinfo at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-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:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact 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/20241030/eab3b4ca/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list