Rebuttal to Mr. Weisberg's insinuations Re: Important News from Don Telage about ARIN

[Jeff Williams]

Robert and all,

  First let me say, that I DO appritiate you candor and concern.  >;)

Robert T. Nelson wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 17 Jul 1997, Eric Weisberg wrote:
> 
> > Robert T. Nelson wrote:
> > >
> > > I hope that Vaden, Weisberg, Fleming, Walker, etc think carefully about
>                                           ^^^^^^
>                                           Williams
> 
> [sorry, Jeff]

  No problem.  >;)  WOndered about that earlier..  LOL!
> 
> > Robert,
> 
> > I suggest that there has been little response to the issues I raise.  I
> > think Gordon, has been the exception and has genuinely tried to nudge
> > the process in the right direction.  Instead of dealing with my points,
> > people questioned my motivation and accused me of attacking the Net.
> > That, I do not accept.
> 
> I do not question your motivation. I presume that you do what you feel is
> best (difficult as that may be to discern, given issues like this one) for
> you and your business. I believe that you raise important points, however
> I also think that theyu are somewhat misdirected. I think you would be
> better off (on the IP Space issue) pushing for ARIN to be formed, and and
> working to see to it that all of us Netizens out here are protected from
> entities who try to hijack the process.

  I don't think that Eric or anyone associated with NAIR is intrested
in Hijacking anything, if that is your inferance here.  What I believe
NAIR is considering is a parallel situation to ARIN, but with the 
LITTLE guys in mind.  I don't see this in any of the documentation
for ARIN.  In fact from what has been posted here the intrest seems
to be to protect the BIG IPS's, not the little regional providers.
In fact on several posts, that has been spelled out quite clearly.
Hence I have GREAT disatisfaction.  Just becouse we are small doesn't
mean we are stupid!  I and many other small regional ISP's want an
equal footing in the allocation of IP space as well and Registry service
should we so choose.  This is where many regional ISP's have had trouble
in serviving becouse of the disperportionate allocation of IP space
and the terrible managment of Domain names from InterNic at times.
Check the legal record's yourself, it is avalible to anyone who CARES
to reasearch it.
> 
> >
> > I want to be subject to a REPRESENTATIVE system.  And, I suggest that it
> > should be created in a democratic process--a vote of the governed or of
> > some broadly representative group.  I question whether that has
> > occurred.
> 
> You are currently not subject to a representative system at all. ARIN will
> bring more representation to the process, not less.

  True, better, but not nearly good enough.  The process of needing to
get IP space form an upstream provider at their whim, isn't
representative
at all.
> 
> I suggest to you, and to Peter, that you join ARIN as members, and make
> your voice heard, and subject to the consensus there.

  Define consensus.  I suggest it should be by majority rule, not a
rough
consensus.
> 
> >
> > I am not criticizing Jon Postel.  I am criticizing top-down governance.
> > I am alleging and criticizing a failure to publically discuss how ARIN
> > should be organized.
> 
> Unfortunately, this is a computer. Unless you have a better programming
> model, I think you need to stick with it for a while. ARIN seems to me to
> be a step in the right direction. I think that in no more than 10 years
> we will have to go at this again, to wean the Internet further off of its'
> "parents".

  It won't even take a year.
> 
> >
> > You may have discussed ARIN's structure to death before I came along and
> > decided that a self-appointing board is what you want.  Maybe there was
> > a public vote to do it this way.  If so, I owe and give a lot of people
> > an appology and will understand their reluctance to accept it.  If such
> > a process has not occurred, I suggest that it should. I ask you to
> > respond to this suggestion rather than attacking my motives or
> > integrity.
> 
> I will certainly respond to this. I have not been actively involved in the
> debate over ARIN. There are parts of the proposal that I am not wild
> about. I am personally pleased that leaders in the Internet Community have
> come up with an idea to get NSI out of the IP Space business, even if it
> takes NSI to start it up. It is a step in the right direction.
> 
> A public vote should not necessarily occur on the issue of numeric space.
> Assignment of numbers is somewhat inherently (to me, anyway)
> non-democratic. If you can show me specifically how you intend
> to assign numbers from multiple registries, without having a coordinating
> body, I am very interested. This may sound like the "benevolent dictator"
> system, and to a degree, it is. It will eventually have to be torn apart,
> and a new system born.

  There has never been a succesful "benevolent dictator", approach
in my life time.  I doubt that there will be. Hence many's concerns.
> 
> I do not attack your integrity. I believe that you do what you feel is
> right and just. And i will defend your right to speak your mind, while I
> disagree with you in the same breath.

  Fair enough!  >;)
> 
> >
> > I also suggest that the ARIN "proposal" smacks (to my admittedly
> > sensitive ear) of paternalism.  I read it as saying that the people
> > involved in the Internet are not competent to democratically manage an
> > IP registry in a responsible way and that this function must be
> > entrusted to a board which is out of the reach of the "peasants" (to use
> > an indellicate term which I suspect Gordon would love to withdraw from
> > his prior post).  Thus, some may believe and argue that having a board
> > appointed by NSI (or whomever) was necessary.   If anyone disagrees with
> > my reading of the proposal, they should say so.  Or if anyone believes
> > that a more democratic or representative form of governance would be
> > dangerous, you should discuss your thoughts.  But, no one has responded
> > to me on these points.
> 
> You can hardly form an entity without having a group of "founders".
> As far as peasants go (yes, poor choice of words) do you let your users
> control your network? If you did, wouldn't it be more of a knotwork? It
> really isn't much different. Remove yourself from your personal stake in
> the issue, and look at it objectively.

  This is a market driven ecconomy, hence the users have a stake.  In
fact
without them there is no internet.  SO, I believe that the users need
protection, yes, and also a say.  
> 
> I would hesitate to give numeric assignments the stature of governance. I
> think that that word has sufficient connotations that if we use it in this
> sense, we will set ourselves up for Real Governance (tm) by an Internet
> Government (tm). I do not support that Internet. I think that we don't
> know how to govern, much less govern cyberspace.

  Well we better learn.
> 
> >
> > Sometime in the next year, the BoT is going to appoint an advisory
> > board.  How representative will it be?  Does anyone reallly know?
> > Shouldn't we discuss that process, now?  Or, do you feel this process
> > should go on behind closed doors?
> 
> By my reading of the proposal, it will be as representative as the
> membership insist that it be. If the BoT selects Advisory Council members
> from the membership, then you should be out there selling ARIN as much as
> the next guy to make sure 1) you have wide representation via members and
> Advisory Council seats and 2) the power to oust. The membership will
> consist, by my guess, of the serious stakeholders in IP Space, and those
> who feel qualified to add to the process. If this is not the
> representation you want at ARIN, you should be pushing your kind of people
> to participate. The process, for the initial term, seems fairly
> straighforward, and certainly not behind closed doors. I think you should
> make it you goal to make *damn sure* that come next year, as ARIN reviews
> these processes, that you make your voice heard via your membership and
> the Advisory Council.
> 
> >
> > My comments are directed toward making AN arin (if not THIS arin) work.
> > Am I off base in my stated concerns or premises?  If not, how else do
> > you propose we raise and deal with those issues?
> 
> It is my goal to make these Public trusts, remain in the public trust, in
> a way that the public can trust. Unfortunately, spin gets out of control
> very quickly on the net, and it is very difficult for the organizers to
> respond to everyone's complaints personally. They are then accused of
> being secretive. Mostly they're trying to get something done. For you. And
> me. And them (don't forget them) ;->

  I agree here.  Anit this is very unfortunate indeed.  I am sure that
NAIR will be happy to find ways to work with ARIN.  
> 
> Hopefully I have made myself more clear.
> 
> Yours,
> 
> Rob Nelson

Regards,
-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. IEG. INC. 
Phone :913-294-2375 (v-office)
E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com