[144764] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: wet-behind-the-ears whippersnapper seeking advice on building a
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Curran)
Sun Sep 18 21:20:57 2011
From: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>
To: Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 01:20:37 +0000
In-Reply-To: <38D128A4-627A-4160-BD38-40FE3DF57318@queuefull.net>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Sep 18, 2011, at 2:53 PM, Benson Schliesser wrote:
>=20
> In John's case (on behalf of ARIN as is befitting his role) he welcomes c=
hange as long as it's funneled through the ARIN-managed channels. In other=
words, change is welcome as long as it reinforces ARIN's role as facilitat=
or. =20
Benson -=20
By "ARIN-managed channels", do you mean via mechanisms that were=20
established by those elected by the ARIN membership"?
I do indeed believe that efforts to change ARIN should be directed=20
to through the channels that are overseen by member-elected ARIN=20
Advisory Council and member-elected ARIN Board of Trustees.=20
E.g., if you want to change ARIN policies, then there is the ARIN=20
PDP (Policy Development Process) which is open to anyone and driven=20
by the ARIN Advisory Council. The process is well documented and=20
allows input from the entire community including public polls of=20
support for policy changes by both onsite remote participants of=20
the Public Policy Meeting (PPM). Similarly, if you want to change=20
the scope of ARIN's mission or fees or our operational tasking,
you can talk to the members of the Board of Trustees who are=20
unpaid volunteers elected by the ARIN membership.
Engaging from "within the system" definitely means working via channels=20
that operate or are defined by member-elected bodies of the system. I
don't think you could have any meaningful self-governance in any model
without this occurring (but would welcome examples of good models of=20
governance if you have any counter-examples) =20
However, your statement that I only welcome change funneled through=20
"ARIN-managed channels" is incorrect, as I have made it quite plain=20
on multiple occasions that the structure of the Internet number=20
registry system itself is not necessarily a discussion that should
be held within the existing structure (e.g. RIRs and ICANN), but might=20
also be appropriately held external to the existing structure (such as=20
by operator forums or the Internet Governance Forum). I believe that=20
the community is must always be able to engage in multi-stakeholder=20
self-governance discussions, and that does not imply ARIN having any=20
unique role in facilitation.
Such a perspective (of welcoming discussion in any forum) is perfectly=20
befitting my role at ARIN and not in conflict as you seem to imply, as=20
my job is to make sure that the mission of community-led Internet number=20
resource management is fulfilled, not the promotion any specific=20
organizational model for accomplishing the task.
FYI,
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN
