Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Apr 9, 2010, at 4:09 AM, Joe Greco wrote:

> > > 1) Justify why we need a heavy bureaucracy such as ARIN for IPv6
> > >   numbering resources,
> >
> > Because the members of ARIN (and the other four RIRs) want it that way.
> > And because nobody has yet made a serious proposal to ICANN that
> > would replace ARIN.
>
> Using the organization to justify the need for the organization is
> circular reasoning.
He didn't use the organization.  He used the members of the organizations.

The fact is that the majority of the members of the organization(s)
are sufficiently happy with the status quo that they have not seen
fit to change it.  If the members of ARIN want to change or eliminate
the organization, it is within their power to do so.

> > > 2) Tell me why something like the old pre-depletion pre-ARIN model
> > >   of InterNIC and just handing out prefixes with substantially less
> > >   paper-pushing wouldn't result in a cheaper-to-run RIR.
> >
> > Because the ARIN members, who pay most of ARIN's fees, are not
> > complaining about the level of those fees. This means that they
> > think the fees are cheap enough, or else they would demand that
> > the fees be changed. All ARIN fees are set by the ARIN members.
>
> Again, ...
>
> Anyways, the non-answers to these questions are very illuminating.
While this may not be the answer you wanted, I do not think it
is a non-answer. ARIN is a membership driven organization.
The members have the power to change the organization.
There will be another election this fall. If you think there is
significant support for changing the organization, then you
should run for the Board of Trustees and champion those
changes.

Owen