<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hello<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 15/08/2024 13:43, John Curran wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:6E5A1BAC-8FBB-4771-BBDB-FEBBDFD906A0@arin.net">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<br>
<div><clip>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Fernando - </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I am having trouble following you and believe we may have
moved into two (or three) separate topics. If you are asking
whether or not I believe an RIR governing body can be elected
by its membership (rather than some larger group called the
“community”), then the answer to that is certainly yes. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
I am by no means referring to ARIN Board or any RIR Board which is
the governing body and this one I fully agree has to be chosen only
by membership. I am indeed referring to region’s policy development
process for number resource management policies.
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:6E5A1BAC-8FBB-4771-BBDB-FEBBDFD906A0@arin.net">
<div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div><clip´><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If you are referring specifically to a region’s policy
development process for number resource management policies,
then the requirements are quite clear. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Per ICP-2 - </div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;">
<div>
<div>
<div><i>3) Bottom-up self-governance structure for setting
local policies</i></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div><i><br>
</i></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div><i>The new RIR needs to have and to clearly document
defined procedures for the development of resource
management policies which may be implemented regionally,
as well as those that may be recommended to the Address
Council for consideration as global policies. These
procedures must be open and transparent, be accessible
to all interested parties, and ensure fair
representation of all constituencies within the region.</i></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div><i><br>
</i></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div><i>These procedures should include holding at least one
annual policy development meeting that is open and
accessible to all interested parties.</i></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div><i><br>
</i></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div><i>In addition to public meetings, the new RIR needs to
maintain public archived mailing lists to discuss policy
development.</i></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div><i><br>
</i></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div><i>Further, the new RIR should have the capability to
undertake its responsibility to host an Address Council
General Assembly Meeting, as described in section 5 of
the ASO MoU.</i></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div>All interested parties must be must have access to a
process which is open and transparent and ensures fair
representation of all constituencies within the region.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>There is nothing that precludes or constrains an RIR from
having involvement of their governing board, an advisory
council, or any other body in those processes (and in fact, it
recognizes that some policies will explicitly have another
body - the Address Council) so long as it does not adversely
impact the open/transoparent/accessible nature of the process.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Here's where we differ. You may consider "be accessible to all
interested parties" as simply giving community voice to
participate, if I understand it correctly, but I consider it
having community as decision makers of the process, by having the
pen on their hands and by being able to participate on the
decision without having to be chosen by membership only. When I
say unbalanced in ARIN current structure is because the ultimate
decisions are all with the membership represented by the Board and
by the AC. Not even the pen in the authors hand after the proposal
is accepted as a draft is allowed. I personally don't consider it
fully accessible and balanced.</p>
<p>I agree about all concerns related to the fiduciary duty
membership represented by the Board has with the organization and
also fully understand eventual confusions by authors who have
little or no experience when presenting a proposal, but above that
what matters more is to have a real and equalized participation of
all interested parties which includes community people being able
to be not only elected by also chosen by community. There are
enough mechanisms to counterweight eventual mistakes and abuses
from any stakesholder in this process. Number resource management
policies affect both membership and community.<br>
</p>
<p>Best regards<br>
Fernando <br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:6E5A1BAC-8FBB-4771-BBDB-FEBBDFD906A0@arin.net">
<div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div>/John</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>John Curran</div>
<div>President and CEO</div>
<div>American Registry for Internet Numbers</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>