jcurran at arin.net
Tue Mar 25 10:03:39 UTC 2014
On Mar 25, 2014, at 5:04 PM, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote:
>> I do not agree with the characterization that "... we are ruled by
>> self-perptuating monopolies which lack oversight and accountability",
> when you have a governance committee which is composed of the governing,
> not outsiders and governance experts, with no term limits, it would seem
> hard to support that argument.
Acknowledged, and I will provide that feedback to the Board.
I have nothing against term limits (but I also did not champion them back
when I was an elected member of the Board of Trustees.) Many cite risk
of losing well-qualified and experienced Board members right when they
are most productive as the counter-argument. This is probably a fairly
prolonged discussion, and the ARIN membership also needs to weigh in...
>> - Simple terms and conditions for contracts with registries
>> - Membership organizations for registries with term limits
>> for Board and advisory bodies
>> - Board diversity (meaning real world users)
>> - Competitive registries
>> - ...
> i pretty much agree that arin should do these. except ...
> iff we could get reasonable governance, i am not sure we need multiple
> rirs. after all, the registries were just supposed to be bookkeepers.
> but i agree that competition is a good method of injecting some reality
> into the physics in the absense of other means.
> but i eagerly await the simplification of arin's ts&cs. and get rid of
> being able to change them unilateraly and arbitrarily, and get rid the
> silly game about legacy rights, and a whole bunch of us might join.
I will note that this discussion is presently on nanog, and I am not
certain that all of the ARIN Board members subscribe... I will forward
your message to the Board, but would you prefer to take this to one of
the ARIN lists, or have a us setup a distinct list for this purpose,
or something else?
President and CEO
More information about the NANOG