Hi Owen
It is good that this is just your own opinion. You are entitled to it of
course.
Of course they seek to abide by ARIN policies and pay fees otherwise
their need don't move. They don't have any other choice. But it is not
hard to think if they had enough power to change policies in order to
make their business more easy and with less "blocks" caused by good
policies developed by experienced people with major interest in the
community needs, to exist fairness in resource allocation and that
everyone is served reasonably and equally regardless their size and how
much money they have do you really think they would refrain from doing
that ? It is not because maybe a single person wasn't able to move
forward things that are beneficial to a minority and to specific
business because he/she didn't have enough votes or support that he/she
or them would not do if they had. In my view is naive to think most
would balance well community interests and an specific business interest.
Regarding the ad hominem attacks thing please just refrain from saying
this every time someone say anything that bothers reading and contrary
to your own thinking. I ask you to make an effort to separate a mere
annoyance and endeavor to put arguments to defend your points and the
discussion can continue fine.
Regards
Fernando
On 26/10/2023 15:06, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Oct 26, 2023, at 09:49, Fernando Frediani <[email protected]>
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<[email protected]> 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 ([email protected]).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
