[139771] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv4 address exchange
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Curran)
Tue Apr 19 16:07:33 2011
From: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>
To: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 20:07:27 +0000
In-Reply-To: <44826AB7-0CE7-4082-85FE-EF9EAA950362@virtualized.org>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Apr 19, 2011, at 3:29 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> to the list I provided you in the previous message. Or are you implying t=
hat ARIN and the other RIRs are committing to synchronizing their databases=
with alternative address registrars as they become established?
If by "established", you mean as a result of global policy established=20
by multi-stakeholder, private sector led, bottom-up policy development=20
model? Quite likely, as ARIN has committed to such principles and has
an excellent track record of supporting Internet registry changes that=20
result (e.g. the establishment and recognition of LACNIC and AfriNIC)
>>> What venue do you propose for a global consultative action to be taken =
in an open, transparent, an unbiased manner?
>> I've suggested ICANN, IGF, or the RIRs...
>=20
> I find ARIN's new found interests in engaging in ICANN-related processes =
heartwarming given my past experiences, but I suspect both the ICANN and RI=
R venues would be somewhat biased against changing the status quo. As for =
the IGF, my perhaps mistaken perception is that it has a slightly different=
focus than dealing with the operational implications of the proliferation =
of alternative address registrars. The main problem is one of timeliness. I=
doubt the market is going to wait for IGF, ICANN, or even RIR processes. B=
ut we'll see.=20
Quite true... it's very hard to complete in a timely manner something=20
that hasn't yet been started. =20
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN
