I oppose this draft policy on the grounds expressed by a few others here..I would like to see ARIN keep community networks and look at a redefinition of . I agree also that there is perhaps a need to also rework the 100% requirement but be also mindful of possible abuse in doing so. RD On Jun 13, 2017 11:43 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > 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-PPML digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2017-2: Removal of Community Networks > (Marita Moll) > 2. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2017-2: Removal of Community Networks > (Jason Schiller) > 3. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2017-2: Removal of Community Networks > ([email protected]) > 4. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2017-2: Removal of Community Networks > (Marita Moll) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 21:57:20 -0400 > From: Marita Moll <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-2: Removal of > Community Networks > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" > > Hello all. As part of NARALO, I attended the ARIN mtg in New Orleans and > became aware of the policy re: community networks. I don't have all the > details others can contribute. But I have been involved on the policy > side with community networks in Canada for 20 years, so can provide a > small slice of context from here. > > I totally agree that community networks see a lot of value in being > recognized in ARIN policy. The few are doing well, others struggle to > exist. But they have been and in some areas are still an important part > of the Internet access landscape. It is difficult, as it is, to even > locate these scattered entities. Deleting language the recognizes their > existence would be a shame. > > The 100% volunteer driven requirement is not realistic. I don't know > what it should be. Even 70% volunteer driven might not bring in much > more activity in the short term but it would be a recognition that the > non-profit/cooperative model is a viable option for communities trying > to manage their own access issues. > > Marita Moll > > Telecommunities Canada (loose coalition of community networks in Canada) > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/ > attachments/20170613/c2530e50/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 22:35:23 -0400 > From: Jason Schiller <[email protected]> > To: Marita Moll <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-2: Removal of > Community Networks > Message-ID: > <CAC4yj2Xf5+vDgkDHv4+nyxrM3Soiik7EU6KiRYqJpqK5wKsJa > [email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Marita, > > I take to message to mean having ARIN policy for community networks > is helpful, and the policy is not used by community networks, because > the 100% volunteer requirement disqualifies many who would benefit > which is why the policy has gone unused. > > The next step is coming up with a definition that will support community > networks, but not allow other organizations to abuse the definition as a > loophole. > > The conversation needs to shift to how do we define "community networks" > in a useful way. > > Propose a definition for community networks. > > Can you borrow from other definitions of community networks > that you come across in your sphere, such as say the tax codes, > or access to some other privilege that community networks may > be granted? > > I suspect the ARIN community would be happy dropping the volunteer > requirement if there was some other way to separate out things > that are community networks. > > __Jason > > > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 9:57 PM, Marita Moll <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hello all. As part of NARALO, I attended the ARIN mtg in New Orleans and > > became aware of the policy re: community networks. I don't have all the > > details others can contribute. But I have been involved on the policy > side > > with community networks in Canada for 20 years, so can provide a small > > slice of context from here. > > > > I totally agree that community networks see a lot of value in being > > recognized in ARIN policy. The few are doing well, others struggle to > > exist. But they have been and in some areas are still an important part > of > > the Internet access landscape. It is difficult, as it is, to even locate > > these scattered entities. Deleting language the recognizes their > existence > > would be a shame. > > > > The 100% volunteer driven requirement is not realistic. I don't know what > > it should be. Even 70% volunteer driven might not bring in much more > > activity in the short term but it would be a recognition that the > > non-profit/cooperative model is a viable option for communities trying to > > manage their own access issues. > > > > Marita Moll > > > > Telecommunities Canada (loose coalition of community networks in Canada) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PPML > > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > > > > > > -- > _______________________________________________________ > Jason Schiller|NetOps|[email protected]|571-266-0006 > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/ > attachments/20170613/5ea2e365/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 22:57:24 -0400 (EDT) > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-2: Removal of > Community Networks > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > I am opposed to the Draft Policy ARIN-2017-2 for community networks, as I > do not think the community network language should be removed from the > Policy Manual. Instead, the policy should be fixed to allow its use. > > In order for the policy to be useable, amendments need to be made to the > policy, such as lowering the 100% volunteer requirement which has been > identifed as a reason the policy has never been used. > > Ideas to cut the fees for community networks should also be considered. > True community networks operate on a shoestring, and generally cannot > afford ISP level fees. > > Albert Erdmann > Network Administrator > Paradise On Line Inc. > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2017, Marita Moll wrote: > > > Hello all. As part of NARALO, I attended the ARIN mtg in New Orleans and > > became aware of the policy re: community networks. I don't have all the > > details others can contribute. But I have been involved on the policy > side > > with community networks in Canada for 20 years, so can provide a small > slice > > of context from here. > > > > I totally agree that community networks see a lot of value in being > > recognized in ARIN policy. The few are doing well, others struggle to > exist. > > But they have been and in some areas are still an important part of the > > Internet access landscape. It is difficult, as it is, to even locate > these > > scattered entities. Deleting language the recognizes their existence > would be > > a shame. > > > > The 100% volunteer driven requirement is not realistic. I don't know > what it > > should be. Even 70% volunteer driven might not bring in much more > activity in > > the short term but it would be a recognition that the > non-profit/cooperative > > model is a viable option for communities trying to manage their own > access > > issues. > > > > Marita Moll > > > > Telecommunities Canada (loose coalition of community networks in Canada) > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:43:23 -0400 > From: Marita Moll <[email protected]> > To: Jason Schiller <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-2: Removal of > Community Networks > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" > > Might be breaking new ground here re: definitions. I will check around. > It will take a few days. > > Marita > > 17 10:35 PM, Jason Schiller wrote: > > Marita, > > > > I take to message to mean having ARIN policy for community networks > > is helpful, and the policy is not used by community networks, because > > the 100% volunteer requirement disqualifies many who would benefit > > which is why the policy has gone unused. > > > > The next step is coming up with a definition that will support community > > networks, but not allow other organizations to abuse the definition as a > > loophole. > > > > The conversation needs to shift to how do we define "community networks" > > in a useful way. > > > > Propose a definition for community networks. > > > > Can you borrow from other definitions of community networks > > that you come across in your sphere, such as say the tax codes, > > or access to some other privilege that community networks may > > be granted? > > > > I suspect the ARIN community would be happy dropping the volunteer > > requirement if there was some other way to separate out things > > that are community networks. > > > > __Jason > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 9:57 PM, Marita Moll <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > Hello all. As part of NARALO, I attended the ARIN mtg in New > > Orleans and became aware of the policy re: community networks. I > > don't have all the details others can contribute. But I have been > > involved on the policy side with community networks in Canada for > > 20 years, so can provide a small slice of context from here. > > > > I totally agree that community networks see a lot of value in > > being recognized in ARIN policy. The few are doing well, others > > struggle to exist. But they have been and in some areas are still > > an important part of the Internet access landscape. It is > > difficult, as it is, to even locate these scattered entities. > > Deleting language the recognizes their existence would be a shame. > > > > The 100% volunteer driven requirement is not realistic. I don't > > know what it should be. Even 70% volunteer driven might not bring > > in much more activity in the short term but it would be a > > recognition that the non-profit/cooperative model is a viable > > option for communities trying to manage their own access issues. > > > > Marita Moll > > > > Telecommunities Canada (loose coalition of community networks in > > Canada) > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PPML > > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>). > > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > > <http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml> > > Please contact [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> if you > > experience any issues. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > _______________________________________________________ > > Jason Schiller|NetOps|[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>|571-266-0006 > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/ > attachments/20170613/13023ab0/attachment.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-PPML mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > > ------------------------------ > > End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 144, Issue 16 > ****************************************** >
_______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
