ARIN, was Re: 72/8 friendly reminder

Edward Lewis Ed.Lewis at
Thu Mar 24 20:20:08 UTC 2005

At 17:01 +0000 3/24/05, Andrew Dul wrote:

>I agree, I'd certainly like to see more people actively participate in the
>process.  If nanog folks believe that the ARIN membership is not getting the
>right stuff done...  How do we fix this problem?   How do we get more
>operators involved and active in the RIRs?

In the spirit of cart and horse, it's not about getting more 
operators involved in ARIN.  It's about getting operators to use ARIN 
as a resource in the proper way.  (I'm addressing operators here as 
this is NANOG.)

What do operators expect from ARIN?  Most ARIN policies are centered 
on the administrative function of allocation of address space and AS 
numbers.  Is that all there is?  Are the existing policies all that 
are needed?

Are there concerns about the live-in-the-network registry services 
like WhoIs, DNS, IRIS, routing registry?  There are not many policy 
proposals (lame delegations, privacy concerns with WhoIs) in play 
covering operational considerations.

ARIN staff has begun work on documenting the registry service level 
agreements, there was a presentation on this in October.  There has 
been little discussion on this by anyone since the presentation.  If 
WhoIs is out, reports fly on NANOG.  But has anyone ever tried to 
quantify what level of service is expected of ARIN's computing 
facilities?  If the staff is doing a good thing by documenting SLA's, 
then they should be encouraged to continue.

There is routing security research work that would require the RIR's 
to issue certificates for use in route update validation.  I would 
hope that someday, before anything goes live, there are operator-led 
tests involving support from ARIN.

>I think colocating 1 ARIN meeting/per year with Nanog in the fall has been a

I would caution that "attending meetings" is neither a sign of 
contribution nor a sign of progress.  Don't get me wrong, making 
meetings easier to attend is good, but we shouldn't attend meetings 
because it is easy, fun or entertaining.  I prefer to have fun at 

>ARIN isn't perfect but it could be a lot worse.  In some ways I think the
>issue you describe is an industry wide problem.  There are many different
>groups (RIRs, ICANN, IETF, Nanogs, etc...)  and participating in all of them
>is a lot of effort, especially when most of us already have full-time jobs.

Participating in all of them *is* a full-time job. ;)

>We could of course create a huge beuarcratcy with lots of people to study the
>issues and make policy, but that hasn't been the way the Internet has
>developed and is counter to what many operators think is best for the
>Internet.  That also requires money.  Is that what people want?  I don't
>think so, but I could be wrong.

One the one hand, what built the Internet isn't what will maintain 
it.  A bureaucracy will be needed, the challenge isn't to prevent it 
but to build the best one possible.

If ARIN goes unchecked it'll either be a weakened organization unable 
to serve the community (chaos ensues) or it will become an ogre, 
burdening the community (suffocation).  It benefits operators to be 
involved, but the real trick is to realize what kind of involvement 
is needed.

Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468

Achieving total enlightenment has taught me that ignorance is bliss.

More information about the NANOG mailing list