[NAIPR] ARIN Proposal

[Jeffrey C. Ollie]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Thu, 23 Jan 1997 22:13:41 -0600 (CST), karl at mcs.net writes:
>
>> >This is really orthogonal to ARIN, except that ARIN could be used in this
>> >way, and if it is, then the MEMBERS can end up being assaulted in this
>> >fashion.  It is in EVERYONE'S best interest to make sure that doesn't happe
>n
>> >by having ARIN be completely above question when it comes to policy matters
>,
>> >board constitution, etc.
>>
>> This is starting to sound more and more like a conspiracy theory.
>
>Nope.  Its a concern that could turn into reality.  I don't have a problem
>with ARIN as long as it doesn't, and that it is truly a neutral organization
>working to keep the 'net running smoothly AND on a reasonably-level playing
>field..

The fact that the folks at the InterNIC are running this public mailing
list (which they appear to be listening to) ought to allay most concerns.
Sure, there are problems with the first draft of the proposal but we've
received assurances that they should be corrected in the next draft.

I just hope that they get the new proposal out soon so some of the
uproar will die down.

[ discussion of RFC 2008 deleted ]

As I was typing this, I started wondering what past address block
allocations really have to do with ARIN. Other than some maintenance
activities, ARIN's concern is really future address block allocations.

>> Replacing Bay with Bay and Cisco with Cisco is not comparable to
>> replacing with Brand X. I forgot to mention all of the money network
>> operators have tied up in Bay and/or Cisco training.
>
>Aha.  So now it comes down to "I like the software interface better", not
>"does the box work better".  I am beginning to understand the dynamic here.
>
>Never mind that the replacements that I'm looking at run about half the
>price of the CISCO hardware with "comparable" capabilities, and blow their
>doors off both in configuration flexibility AND performance.  Oh, you DO
>need a brain to use them -- big whoopee deal.
>
>Of course, at ~2.4M pps I'll demand a brain from my engineers anyway :-)

No, I think that the software interface on BOTH Bay and Cisco routers
are poor (and all of the other routers and terminal servers that I've
seen).

Personally, I would like to get my hands on some of the really cool
new stuff out there and give it a whirl. Hell, I wish that some of the
companies that are building these new boxes were located closer to me
and were hiring when I was looking for a new job a couple of months
ago.

But I wouldn't bet a business on them yet.

>> >Why do you assume I'm opposed to ARIN?  I've not made that statement
>> >anywhere in this discussion.
>>
>> Not directly you haven't, but the general tone of your statements has
>> led me to believe that you opposed ARIN.
>
>Nonsense.

I stand corrected.


[A copy of the headers and the PGP signature follow.]

Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 22:54:45 -0600
From: "Jeffrey C. Ollie" <jeff at ollie.clive.ia.us>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 23 Jan 1997 22:13:41 CST."
             <199701240413.WAA10454 at Jupiter.Mcs.Net>
Subject: Re: [NAIPR] ARIN Proposal
To: naipr at internic.net

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: AnySign 1.4 - A Python tool for PGP signing e-mail and news.

iQCVAwUBMuhAmZwkOQz8sbZFAQFC/wP/VT/namYIdDqplCuwRops5m/x9TOYtPqL
6r84L1ijSgPNeDfZZEBvf5JQglLcSVPnS/gIpzjld8+bocbp6qURbX1AGGVAARhf
Yts9JG2nv0aETltSc+FSHrVEYzza43VyD+hUg9y2KylYLnEX3rl5kNLyLoL0d+NF
qAFdNjQ9n5g=
=gbMh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jeffrey C. Ollie                     |            Should Work Now (TM)
Python Hacker, Mac Lover             |