[134770] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: arin and ops fora (was Re: AltDB?)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Jan 10 18:17:31 2011
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D2B24F9.9000507@brightok.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 15:13:30 -0800
To: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
Cc: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>, NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jan 10, 2011, at 7:25 AM, Jack Bates wrote:
> On 1/9/2011 5:27 PM, John Curran wrote:
>> Excellent question. To the extent that it is best practices on these =
types of
>> services, then that's relatively easy for ARIN to interface with... =
if it is
>> specific direction to ARIN to "do xyz", then ultimately the decision =
rests with
>> the ARIN Board regarding that input, since that involves how we spend =
the service
>> fees of the members.
>>=20
>=20
> Which ARIN membership does have some resources on, though I do believe =
they could be improved, as most membership input deals more with the =
NRPM and not with auxiliary services.
>=20
Members may bring any topic of interest to arin-discuss. The fact that =
there is more
traffic on ppml dealing with the NRPM than there is on arin-discuss =
dealing with other
issues is a matter of where the members choose to focus their attention =
more than
anything else.
>> The role is served by the ARIN Board, which is member-elected and =
composed of
>> volunteers (and myself as CEO). If folks think that a more formal =
structure
>> for operational input (either within ARIN or via liaison to another =
body) is
>> called for, I'd suggest continued discussion on the various mailing =
lists.
>>=20
>=20
> It's always a stickler, too. PPML works well for NRPM, but ARIN =
doesn't have enough auxiliary services to warrant a mailing list dealing =
with them. It becomes more of a suggestion, proposal, feedback, =
implementation, more feedback process. ARIN is generally good at =
notification of implementation concerning new services, though it would =
be nice if they had better channels for feedback through the entire =
process of new services so that they could be closer in sync with the =
membership. I don't believe services should reach the PDP level, but =
better communication wouldn't hurt, especially with members who =
generally don't know how or realize they can participate.
>=20
PPML is a forum for the community (not just ARIN members, the entire =
community).
There is a separate mailing list... arin-discuss which is for members of =
ARIN to discuss
any ARIN-related topic of interest to the membership. They can and =
sometimes do
discuss operational matters there.
Additionally, there is the ACSP which allows members or the community to =
send comments
and suggestions to ARIN regarding anything, including operations, etc. =
The ACSP provides
a process for community review of the suggestions and semi-formal =
comment processes as
well.
Everything you are asking for in your last paragraph is available. =
Perhaps what is needed
is better education of the membership and community on what tools are =
available and how
to use them. Were you familiar with arin-discuss prior to this message? =
If so, in what way
does it not meet the need you are describing?
I'm not trying to pick on you Jack. I'm really trying to identify if =
what we have here is an
issue of needing better tools, or, if all we need is better education =
and utilization of the
tools that are already in place, or, some combination of both.
Thanks,
Owen
