[136880] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Benson Schliesser)
Sun Feb 6 00:27:14 2011
From: Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net>
In-Reply-To: <D0EC544F-678D-40C8-AE80-4F9B2721BA3A@corp.arin.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 23:25:16 -0600
To: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>,
Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Feb 5, 2011, at 10:48 PM, John Curran wrote:
> You are correct that consensus doesn't assure legality; hence
> all draft policies receive a specific staff and legal review=20
> during the development process.=20
Thanks, John. I'm aware of the legal review, as well as the AC and =
board "gateways" to policy adoption. I don't have any recommendation =
for improving that process, per se - just a healthy dose of skepticism =
that it will always result in alignment with the law, especially given =
that the legal authority of ARIN isn't clearly defined.
On Feb 5, 2011, at 10:44 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> As to reflecting community standards, I'm not sure what better measure =
of "community standards"
> one could propose beyond a bottom-up open consensus driven policy =
process such as what
> we have today.
Owen, my point is that the ARIN community does not necessarily reflect =
the community at large. Just like the common standards within the mafia =
community aren't necessarily aligned with the broader standards of civil =
society.
If ARIN is appointed in an official capacity (i.e. granted such =
authority by the government, or by popular vote etc) to determine =
specific community standards then we don't have to worry. Otherwise, =
ARIN has to work carefully to ensure that it doesn't go awry. In that =
sense, the relative smallness of the ARIN community and ARIN's =
organizational momentum (natural to any self-preserving organization) =
should be of concern.
Cheers,
-Benson
