Send ARIN-consult mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ARIN-consult digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Reminder - Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure
(David Farmer)
2. Re: [ARIN-Suggestions] ARIN Issues Response to ACSP 2021.15:
Auto Renew ROAs for Hosted RPKI; Receives Three New Suggestions
(David Farmer)
3. Re: Reminder - Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure
(Owen DeLong)
4. Re: Reminder - Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure
(Owen DeLong)
5. Re: Reminder - Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure
(Owen DeLong)
6. Re: Reminder - Consultation on ARIN?s Membership Structure
(Owen DeLong)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 12:05:50 -0600
From: David Farmer <[email protected]>
To: John Curran <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Reminder - Consultation on ARIN?s
Membership Structure
Message-ID:
<can-dau12ytcf-brguvbmzye4eimwv-cfsvkhbfxn6zzlmbg...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 11:36 AM John Curran <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Nov 8, 2021, at 12:02 PM, David Farmer <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Why are these other forms of participation excluded in favor of only
> voting as a means to demonstrate an organization's participation in ARIN's
> governance to maintain general membership status?
>
> David -
>
> It?s quite possible to consider some of these other forms of participation
> as possible indications of an organizational decision to participate in
> ARIN governance, but that will need some careful study since some of these
> (e.g nomination, committee participation, mailing list participation) are
> actually undertaken by individuals and don?t necessarily represent as clear
> organizational decision.
>
>From this year's call for noncom volunteers, dated May 4th, 2021,
"volunteers must be from an ARIN Member organization in Good Standing." And
my recollection is, that most other calls for other committee volunteers
over the years have included similar language. I explicitly did not include
mailing list participation, because determining the member organization
relationship for each email would indeed be burdensome both for ARIN and
the participants. Further, it could potentially obstruct or limit
participation in the mailing lists, which would not be a good outcome.
Nevertheless, I would like to see governance participation beyond simply
voting to be considered.
Thanks.
As usual, we?re open to refinements but felt it important to have the
> membership change available in January and hence kept the criteria quite
> simple.
>
> Thanks,
> /John
>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>
>
>
--
===============================================
David Farmer Email:[email protected]
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/attachments/20211108/7c65ef99/attachment-0001.htm>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 12:10:55 -0600
From: David Farmer <[email protected]>
To: John Curran <[email protected]>, Brad Gorman <[email protected]>,
"<[email protected]>" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [ARIN-Suggestions] ARIN Issues Response to ACSP 2021.15:
Auto Renew ROAs for Hosted RPKI; Receives Three New Suggestions
Message-ID:
<CAN-Dau3kokyBntep33tOT++j=z9c2ddy5rfoz2-p6vncjnk...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 9:31 AM ARIN <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 14 September, ARIN issued its response to ACSP 2021.15: Auto Renew ROAs
> for Hosted RPKI. The suggestion and response can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/suggestions/2021/2021-15/
With the inclusion of auto-renewal in the following specification by MANRS,
it would be useful to get an updated timeline for ACSP 2021.15
https://www.manrs.org/resources/common-roa-management-requirements-and-security-standards-for-operators-of-rpki-services-ors/
It would also be helpful to know where the other items in the specification
are in ARIN's roadmap for RPKI.
Thanks
--
===============================================
David Farmer Email:[email protected]
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/attachments/20211108/c32a4df7/attachment-0001.htm>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 19:50:35 -0800
From: Owen DeLong <[email protected]>
To: Bill Woodcock <[email protected]>
Cc: John Curran <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Reminder - Consultation on ARIN?s
Membership Structure
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> On Nov 8, 2021, at 09:13 , Bill Woodcock <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Nov 8, 2021, at 6:09 PM, Owen DeLong via ARIN-consult
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> What is the problem with those organizations (continuing to) abstain from
>> voting, but retaining their rights to vote?
>
> Quorum. We can?t hold an election where most members don?t vote, because
> then the election is invalid and we have to start over.
>
> So, we have to make sure that most members vote. Which is already difficult.
> If we have more members, it becomes even more difficult to achieve quorum.
>
> The simplest way of fixing this would be to stop being a membership
> organization as a legal structure, but retain voting as a governance
> practice. Had ARIN?s original founders been more clueful in the ways of
> non-profits, that?s how it would have been set up. Tearing it down and
> building a new one correctly is possible but not trivial.
Is quorum fixed at ?a majority? by law, or is that done by bylaws?
Obviously, if it?s a legal requirement, that?s immutable and we need to get
more creative. Given the three year lag
on disenfranchising people, I have to wonder if there isn?t a likely problem
even with this proposal.
OTOH, if it?s a bylaw requirement, then perhaps we set a lower quorum threshold
as an alternative solution.
Owen
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 19:52:02 -0800
From: Owen DeLong <[email protected]>
To: Richard Laager <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Reminder - Consultation on ARIN?s
Membership Structure
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> On Nov 8, 2021, at 09:22 , Richard Laager <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 11/8/21 11:09 AM, Owen DeLong via ARIN-consult wrote:
>> Even if I go long enough for my voter registration to be expired (which IIRC
>> is something like 10 consecutive years of non-voting), I still have the
>> ability to re-register for the next election.
>
> How is this meaningfully different from what ARIN proposes? If you go 3 years
> without voting at ARIN, your "voter registration" expires, but all you have
> to do is re-register and then you can vote.
If I don?t vote in 2022, 2023, 2024, then I have NO WAY to get my voting
privileges restored prior to 2026 as I read the proposal.
In California, if I don?t vote from 2015-2024 and lose my registration, I can
still register in time for the 2025 election.
That?s a meaningful difference IMHO.
Owen
>
> --
> Richard
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Consult
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult
> Mailing
> List ([email protected]).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN
> Member Services
> Help Desk at [email protected] if you experience any issues.
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 19:53:33 -0800
From: Owen DeLong <[email protected]>
To: Chris Woodfield <[email protected]>
Cc: "<[email protected]>" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Reminder - Consultation on ARIN?s
Membership Structure
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
What if we simply required ALL member organizations to register to vote every
three years?
Owen
> On Nov 8, 2021, at 09:55 , Chris Woodfield <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> If I?m reading the proposal correctly the main difference is that per the
> proposed rule, if you do not vote in three years, you can?t re-register for
> the following election, but instead have to wait a year out before
> re-registering interest in becoming a General Member.
>
> In principle, I don?t disagree with the requirement for a member to
> proactively register their interest in voting or other participation, with a
> substantial deadline for this registration before that year?s election. That
> said, The one-year ?suspension? period for non-participation doesn?t sit will
> with me.
>
> I think a fairer system could be proposed where instead of failure to vote
> carries a one-year suspension of voting privileges, it could instead trigger
> a requirement to re-register ones intent to participate within a certain
> amount of time before the next year?s election. Ideally, this would be done
> as soon as the org?s status as a General Member is at risk, with ample
> opportunities for the org to re-register before the next year?s election.
>
> -C
>
>> On Nov 8, 2021, at 9:22 AM, Richard Laager <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/8/21 11:09 AM, Owen DeLong via ARIN-consult wrote:
>>> Even if I go long enough for my voter registration to be expired (which
>>> IIRC is something like 10 consecutive years of non-voting), I still have
>>> the ability to re-register for the next election.
>>
>> How is this meaningfully different from what ARIN proposes? If you go 3
>> years without voting at ARIN, your "voter registration" expires, but all you
>> have to do is re-register and then you can vote.
>>
>> --
>> Richard
>> _______________________________________________
>> ARIN-Consult
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
>> Consult Mailing
>> List ([email protected]).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN
>> Member Services
>> Help Desk at [email protected] if you experience any issues.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Consult
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Consult
> Mailing
> List ([email protected]).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the ARIN
> Member Services
> Help Desk at [email protected] if you experience any issues.
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 20:00:10 -0800
From: Owen DeLong <[email protected]>
To: John Curran <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [ARIN-consult] Reminder - Consultation on ARIN?s
Membership Structure
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> On Nov 8, 2021, at 09:58 , John Curran <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> On Nov 8, 2021, at 12:09 PM, Owen DeLong <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> One option would certainly to be have everyone just be ?general members?,
>>> but it?s fairly plain that some organizations just want registry services
>>> and have little interest in participating in ARIN governance activities
>>> (and this characterization applies to both those who are existing
>>> ISP/general members and to end-user organizations.)
>>
>> And what is the problem with those organizations (continuing to) abstain
>> from voting, but retaining their rights to vote?
>
> Owen -
>
> There is nothing wrong with doing so - ARIN could easily have a single
> ?general member? category and 14000+ general members, of which 1000 to 2000
> vote in elections when they wish?. It is a functional model (and any quorum
> matter could be addressed by setting at an appropriate value at the time the
> membership surges with the additional end-user members.)
>
> It certainly suffices, but then again, it pretty much precludes ever having
> the general membership having increased authority over the organization ?as
> the ability for an bad actor to surreptitiously harvest votes from the large
> uninterested and otherwise uninvolved electorate is quite real.
>
> A substantial benefit of an well-defined general membership that is that
> (once stable and smoothly running) it would be possible to consider taking
> more substantial matters of ARIN governance and putting them before that
> general membership. I note that when ARIN started out, all of the authority
> was held by the Board of Trustees (even the ability to ?elect? new Trustees)
> but we have with time and and stability worked to empower ARIN?s membership
> (e.g Election & removal of trustees, formal consultation on certain bylaws
> changes, approval of RSA changes). It is my own personal view that such a
> trend of increasingly vesting authority of the organization with the members
> should continue, but I do believe having a well-defined and active general
> membership is necessary to do so.
That?s fair. I think we still get there if we make general membership for
end-user organizations forced into membership the default. Sure, it might take
3 years, but we do still get there.
I also think that the requirement to sit out a year after you don?t vote for 3
should be removed. An organization which becomes a ?service member? should be
able to convert to ?general member? at any time that a new member joining the
organization would still be able to appoint a voting contact for the current
year.
So if the current proposal were modified such that:
1. Default category for members (new and existing) is general
member until they fail to vote 3 times in a row.
2. A service member may convert to general member at any time, but
eligibility to vote is still subject to the
existing determination deadlines (IOW, you can?t convert in
late September and expect to vote in October,
but if you become a service member in March, you should be able
to convert to general member in July
and still vote in October. Simlilarly, if you become a service
member following an October election, you
should be able to convert back to general membership and vote
in the next election, so long as you do
so prior to the cutoff date for voter eligibility in that
election).
With those two modifications, I would consider the proposal acceptable. Without
them, I still feel that it is overzealous in its efforts to disenfranchise
members.
Owen
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
ARIN-consult mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult
------------------------------
End of ARIN-consult Digest, Vol 85, Issue 14
********************************************
