> On Oct 26, 2023, at 09:49, Fernando Frediani <fhfredi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The very existence of PPML is a block and problem for IP brokers to freely do > business due to the restrictions policies developed here impact their ability > to do whatever their wish to fit to their customer needs. > Last time I saw a IP broker representative speaking to an audience he said > with no shame that it was necessary to remove necessity to justify for the > resources in order to do a transfers. Does anyone really believes that such > person seating on the AC would be able to balance community interests and his > pay checker interests ? >
I believe that it has already been proven that this is possible. I will not name the person, though anyone paying attention can probably identify her easily. I hope she will not be upset that I singled her out. Nonetheless, we have had at least one AC member who worked for an address broker at the beginning of her time on the AC and for a substantial time thereafter. IMHO she served with distinction and honor throughout. I am sorry to see that she is not running for re-election. We didn’t always agree, but I have no doubt that she represented the community honestly and with distinction throughout. > In some way the greedy to freely trade with IP resources lead to a sad and > going history of fraud and dismount of an organization like AfriNic and guess > what ? AfriNic was just trying to impose the current policy developed by the > community when it all started. > In fact, the situation in AFRINIC has very little to do with the greed of a broker and significantly more to do with failure by the registry to follow its own governing documents. For example, consider that there’s a ~8 million address discrepancy between what AFRINIC claims is in their free pool and what should be remaining according to Geoff Huston’s statistics based on their published allocation data. > So when someone say they bring a lot of experience I kind of agree, but > experience that they have learned in order to push their own business ahead > despite any community interest involved, nothing else. > I don’t think that’s a valid assumption to make about everyone that works for every address broker and frankly, I think your statements border on ad hominem attacks. > Of course I am not willing throw stones on these actors and I know and have a > good relationship with some that are serious and are really interested in > facilitating transfers, but in general I am not naive to see very much good > intentions towards the community interests from them to this and other Policy > Development Forums. > You pretty much already have, so that statement is laughable. > Therefore yes, any person affiliated to IP broker should be seen as a high > conflict of interest. > Disagreeing with the community isn’t inherently a conflict of interest. A conflict exists when a person is essentially beholden to two masters whose interests are in conflict. While there are some scenarios where a broker might be at odds with ARIN, this is not inherently the case. Indeed, ARIN maintains a list of brokers that have agreed to abide by ARIN policies and paid fees to ARIN in order to be listed as transfer facilitators. That’s not a conflict, that’s working together harmoniously, even if you don’t like the result. Owen > Fernando > > On 26/10/2023 13:15, William Herrin wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 8:42 AM Adam Thompson <athomp...@merlin.mb.ca> >> <mailto:athomp...@merlin.mb.ca> wrote: >>> 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. >> Hi Adam, >> >> The IP broker's core business directly overlaps with the registry's >> function. -Of course- there's a substantial conflict of interest. >> >> Many folks deeply versed in the issues relevant to ARIN will have jobs >> that offer some conflict of interest. They represent their companies >> before ARIN. But the broker's or "leaser's" is the most substantial of >> all -- it's their *core* business. >> >> That doesn't necessarily mean they should be rejected as candidates. >> After all, they bring a wealth of relevant experience. But at an >> absolute minimum, their conflict of interest statement should >> demonstrate a clear understanding of their situation. Someone who >> doesn't understand the character of his or her conflict of interest >> has no place on the board. >> >> Regards, >> Bill Herrin >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > 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.
