[170521] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: arin representation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Fri Mar 28 16:29:46 2014
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <965c5c80351802153e9cbed38e5e0d2f.squirrel@66.201.44.180>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:29:17 -0400
To: bob@FiberInternetCenter.com
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 25, 2014, at 12:53 PM, Bob Evans <bob@FiberInternetCenter.com> =
wrote:
> Like every governing body, it's easy to criticize it. However, if it =
were
> some big monopoly with giant hidden agendas accomplished behind closed
> doors, I wouldn't see networks like Verizon disappointed at an ARIN
> meeting as their perspective was being over ruled by the majority. I =
have
> seen this at a meeting when Verizon decided to go purchase IPv4 space =
in
> the marketplace as they could not obtain what they tried to justify. =
It
> would have been a huge chunk of what remained. The IPv4 marketplace =
grew
> even more that week.
>=20
> I like term limits for every governing body - except when it's a =
company I
> built with my money. :-)
I've seen term limits significantly harm organizations due to the churn =
that
can happen as a result. Folks aren't as invested long-term as a =
consequence.
This can clearly cut both ways resulting in some positions being =
protected longer
than they should, or allowing the entire "vote the bums out" crowd to =
cause
unstable behavior afterwards.
I believe there are things that ARIN could do better but don't have
the time to invest in the process to correct these. I do take time
to lobby those who I know that are involved in the process and express
my opinion of the ways that ARIN could do a better service for the =
community.
- Jared=
