ARIN, was Re: 72/8 friendly reminder

Fri Mar 25 04:59:49 UTC 2005

> Here's my dilemma.  On the one hand I hear calls for greater operational
> input to ARIN.  On the other hand is empirical evidence that there isn't
> much input being given.
>
Correct...  Generally, you hear those calls coming from ARIN because ARIN
is trying to maximize the involvement of its constituency.  This is a good
thing, but, should not create the illusion that there is not already
significant involvement.  This is sort of one of those "We can always
do better" kind of issues, and, I think that active solicitation is
better than the alternatives.

> What I have been trying to do extract what latent operational input might
> be fed to ARIN, judging from discussions I have seen at other RIRs, the
> IETF, etc.  If there aren't follow ups to these ideas, then I would
> conclude that ARIN isn't dysfunctional and is operating as it should be,
> an idea supported by what is above.  If there are ideas forthcoming, then
> maybe there is a need to encourage participation.
>
Got it.  Yes, I think that there needs to be encouragement for ideas to
be forthcoming whether such ideas exist or not.  I think ARIN is doing
a pretty good job of providing that encouragement.

> This thread was ignited by the desire to have a pingable address in newly
> allocated blocks (from IANA to ARIN), and maybe Randy's suggestion is all
> that is needed - simply asking ARIN to do this. Maybe policies aren't the
> only way to influence ARIN's operation.

Right... So, things divide into two categories... Major Undertakings and
changes to existing policy... Requires policy process.  Easily implemented
obvious wins for everyone (a pingable address within a new block would
be an example here) where the first step should be a polite "Hey ARIN
Staff, can this be done?"  If the staff says "Sure...Easy... look for an
announcement soon.", then my experience has been they tend to get
implemented fairly quickly (I believe this is what I just saw from
Leslie a couple of minutes ago on this very issue).  If the staff says
no, they generally provide reasons and suggestions.  In this case, either
the policy process or an alternative solution is probably in order.

With a minimal reading of the policy manual and some thought, I think
it's fairly easy to sort out which type of request fits in which category.
If in doubt, ask the staff first, they'll be happy to tell you whether
it requires policy or can be done at the staff level.

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20050324/e84a8907/attachment.sig>