wet-behind-the-ears whippersnapper seeking advice on building a nationwide network

Paul Vixie vixie at isc.org
Fri Sep 23 01:03:20 UTC 2011

Benson Schliesser <bensons at queuefull.net> writes:

> Hi, Paul.

sorry for the delay.  i'll include the entirety of this short thread.

>>> For what it's worth, I agree that ARIN has a pretty good governance
>>> structure. (With the exception of NomCom this year, which is shamefully
>>> unbalanced.) ...
>> as the chairman of the 2011 ARIN NomCom, i hope you'll explain further,
>> either publically here, or privately, as you prefer.
> My understanding is that the NomCom consists of 7 people. Of those, 2
> come from the board and 2 come from the AC. Together, those 4 members of
> the existing establishment choose the remaining 3 NomCom members. In the
> past, there was at least the appearance of random selection for some of
> the NomCom members. But in any case, due to its composition, the NomCom
> has the appearance of a body biased in favor of the existing
> establishment.
> Please correct any misunderstanding that I might have. Otherwise, I
> encourage an update to the structure of future NomComs.

can you explain what it was about prior nomcoms that gave the appearance
of random selection?  to the best of my knowledge, including knowledge i
gained as chair of the 2008 ARIN NomCom, we've been doing it the same way
for quite a while now.  so i do not understand your reference to "at least
the appearance of random selection" in the past.

since ARIN members-in-good-standing elect the board and advisory council,
and also make up three of the four seats of the nominations committee, i
do not share your view on "bias" as expressed above.  i think it shows
that ARIN is clearly governed by its members -- which is as it should be.

by your two references to "the existing establishment" do you intend to
imply that ARIN's members don't currently have the establishment that they
want, or that they could not change this establishment if they wanted to,
or that ARIN's members are themselves part of "the existing establishment"
in some way that's bad?

ARIN's bylaws firmly place control of ARIN into the hands of its members.
if you think that's the wrong approach, i'm curious to hear your reasoning
and your proposed alternative.
Paul Vixie

More information about the NANOG mailing list