[170224] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: arin representation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Bush)
Tue Mar 25 02:46:31 2014
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 15:46:03 +0900
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Steve Naslund <SNaslund@medline.com>
In-Reply-To: <9578293AE169674F9A048B2BC9A081B4B542263E@MUNPRDMBXA1.medline.com>
Cc: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>,
North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> I am not sure I understand the argument here. If you think that ARIN
> is not representing the address space holders in proper fashion, how
> would we suggest correcting that?
i have made off the cuff suggestions. but seriously, i would seek real
external governance counsel.
> If an address holder does not become a member (which is fairly easy to
> do if you care enough) how would we even know what their concerns or
> feelings are?
read my lips
> the number of /24s is not proportional to the total number of members
which is why i asked both questions
> Given that the US Gov't holds a vast amount of the legacy space skews
> the results a lot. They might or might not be a "member" but they
> certainly hold a lot of influence in ARINs operation as the one who
> controls the contract. If ARIN was to cross them the wrong way, they
> might not be holding that contract very long.
there is no such contract. arin is not the icann or iana.
randy
