What triggered ARIN ?

[Philip J. Nesser II]

Jim Fleming supposedly said:
> 
> On Wednesday, March 05, 1997 5:31 PM, Philip J. Nesser II[SMTP:pjnesser at MARTIGNY.AI.MIT.EDU] wrote:
> @ Jim Fleming supposedly said:
> @ > 
> @ > The more people you get involved the better...
> @ 
> @ Not necessarily true.  The more people who understand the issues...
> @ 
> 
> Yes...including the following issues...
> 
> 	Intellectual Property Laws
> 	Prior Use and Prior Art
> 	Government Laws
> 	Discrimination
> 	Business Development
> 	Tecno-Economic-Political Decision Making
> 	Capitalization and Business Planning
> 
> ...to name a few...
> 

Thats what legal and business advisors are for. If I am going to form an
organzition (or a business) I try and come up with a model for my
organization, goals, a model for how I do business, etc.  (For example, I
didn't go to a lawyer and ask them how to run my consulting business.  I
decide how I wanted my business to run and then sought legal advise on how
to write contracts, proposals, my liabilities etc.)  Then I go to the
lawyers and see if I am contrained by any of the topics (and a lot more)
you list above.  This is exactly what ARIN is doing.  The legal aspects and
by-laws, etc.. are being reviewed by legal council and hammered out into a
workably complete draft form before they are posted.  Likewise for the
budget, except it is being reviewed by business advisors.

> @ > The more ARIN-like organizations the better...
> @ > 
> @ Very, very unclear.
> @ 
> 
> What would you like clarified...
> 
> 	1. 50 States in the United States...is that clear ?
> 	2. 50 InterNIC clones....is that clear ?
> 	3. 3 TLDs per Clone...is that clear ?
> 	4. 3 TLDs (Infrastructure, Commercial, Free[1])...is that clear ?
> 	5. One /8 space to manage...is that clear ?
> 	6. $250,000 NSF Intellectual Infrastructure grant...is that clear ?
> 
> [1] a "psuedo TLD" could be a TLD....for example, in the State of
> 	Illinois, the Illinois InterNIC could have IL.US as the Free TLD.
> 

We have all seen your proposal at least ten times more than we have seen
any other proposal.  I don't support it, and I doubt many (any?) other
people do.  I don't think plastering it in almost every post you make has
helped gain you any converts.

> @ > The more the Internet is distributed the better...
> @ > 
> @ 
> @ Address allocation is not the Internet.   It is something that needs to be
> @ managed.
> @ 
> 
> Yes...that is why I would like to see it managed
> by companies that are insulated from failing
> but provide opportunities to BOTH the commercial
> and government sectors and ALL 50 States...
> 
> ...what about this is not clear...?
> 

Just out of curiosity (I know I shouldn't do this because all I will get
back is another copy of your proposal, and if I'm lucky maybe another copy
of either the Class A address assignments or the email addresses of the
House and Senate members)  how are you claiming the companies you are
talking about are "insulated from failing"?  And why is it "better" to
create 50 (or pick a number if you want to include the rest of the
Americas)  companies and subsidize them when one non-profit can handle the
job?  ARIN is proposed as a single organization to do the job for cost
recovery which costs the ISP's and hence the community a minimum, whereas
you distributed system serves only to create a false market and effectively
tax the users of the net to support it.

If the NSF asks me (which I doubt they will) how to spend the money in the
infrastructure fund I would tell them to use it to research high bandwidth
network development or at the least use it to install some fiber into some
of the more rural areas.  

> --
> Jim Fleming
> Unir Corporation
> 
> e-mail:
> JimFleming at unety.net
> JimFleming at unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)
> 
> 

--->  Phil