I can't believe I'm taking this position now, but I guess it's 2023 so here we are...
I don't agree that an IP broker *inherently* has a problematic conflict of interest with ARIN, any more than every ARIN member on the AC has some degree of inherent conflict of interest. Every AC member is an ARIN member that obtains resources from ARIN, and thus could be tempted to act solely in their own interests. IP brokers have similar conflicts of interest quantitatively, not necessarily any larger than an LRSA signatory with, say, a /12's worth of resources or more - they just retire and acquire several [new] conflicts of interest every day, as opposed to having the exact same conflict of interest day after day. Yes, of course there's a qualitative difference, but I don't think a comprehensive ontology for conflicts of interest exists yet, never mind a hierarchy. While I really wish IP brokers didn't [need to] exist as an industry, they do, and they appear to be the primary means of IP address distribution today, for better or for worse - and therefore keeping them out in the cold doesn't serve the interests of ARIN or the ARIN membership or the larger internet community. I'd rather see them participating in ARIN governance instead of being what threatens to be an RIR-bypass mechanism. "If you can't beat them, join them" works in both directions. Do they have to carefully manage their COIs? Yes, in exactly the was same every other person on the AC, the board, committees, etc. must. I can't see any reason they would be intrinsically less able to do so, and I feel that insinuation otherwise starts edging towards ad-hominem attacks. As to why they need to exist... well, we all collectively did that to ourselves with the!@#$%^&* pathologically painful transition path to IPv6. (Speaking as someone running a fully v6-enabled ISP/MSP... I have exactly one client who cares. Sigh.) Speaking my own opinions, not necessarily my employer's, -Adam > -----Original Message----- > From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net> On Behalf Of William Herrin > Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2023 9:22 AM > To: Mike Burns <m...@iptrading.com> > Cc: arin-ppml@arin.net > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] AC candidates > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 6:58 AM Mike Burns <m...@iptrading.com> wrote: > > And I agree with Fernando that affiliations or connections to > > IP brokers would be a point in their favor considering they > > are the people distributing IPv4 addresses these days. > > Hi Mike, > > Before considering someone affiliated with an address broker for an > ARIN position, I'd want them to demonstrate that they recognize the > conflict of interest that's likely to pose and have a well conceived > plan for addressing it. > > Conflict of interest corrupts even the best intentioned. I once quit a > job I liked because despite his good intentions my boss unsuccessfully > managed his conflict of interest. It placed me in a position where I > couldn't properly oversee the prime vendor. So I'm sensitive to > conflicts of interest. > > Regards, > Bill Herrin > > > -- > William Herrin > b...@herrin.us > https://bill.herrin.us/ > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
