"Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers
owen at delong.com
Sat Feb 5 23:31:49 CST 2011
On Feb 5, 2011, at 9:25 PM, Benson Schliesser wrote:
> On Feb 5, 2011, at 10:48 PM, John Curran wrote:
>> You are correct that consensus doesn't assure legality; hence
>> all draft policies receive a specific staff and legal review
>> during the development process.
> Thanks, John. I'm aware of the legal review, as well as the AC and board "gateways" to policy adoption. I don't have any recommendation for improving that process, per se - just a healthy dose of skepticism that it will always result in alignment with the law, especially given that the legal authority of ARIN isn't clearly defined.
> On Feb 5, 2011, at 10:44 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> As to reflecting community standards, I'm not sure what better measure of "community standards"
>> one could propose beyond a bottom-up open consensus driven policy process such as what
>> we have today.
> Owen, my point is that the ARIN community does not necessarily reflect the community at large. Just like the common standards within the mafia community aren't necessarily aligned with the broader standards of civil society.
It reflects those who care to participate. The process is open to anyone in the community that want to. That's as close as any body ever comes to such a thing.
Just like you don't get better politicians unless you vote, you can't get better ARIN policy unless you participate.
> If ARIN is appointed in an official capacity (i.e. granted such authority by the government, or by popular vote etc) to determine specific community standards then we don't have to worry. Otherwise, ARIN has to work carefully to ensure that it doesn't go awry. In that sense, the relative smallness of the ARIN community and ARIN's organizational momentum (natural to any self-preserving organization) should be of concern.
An interesting perspective.
More information about the NANOG