Re: arin representation

[John Curran <jcurran () arin net>]

On Mar 25, 2014, at 5:04 PM, Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:

> > I do not agree with the characterization that "... we are ruled by
> > self-perptuating monopolies which lack oversight and accountability",
>
> when you have a governance committee which is composed of the governing,
> not outsiders and governance experts, with no term limits, it would seem
> hard to support that argument.

Acknowledged, and I will provide that feedback to the Board.  

I have nothing against term limits (but I also did not champion them back
when I was an elected member of the Board of Trustees.)  Many cite risk
of losing well-qualified and experienced Board members right when they 
are most productive as the counter-argument.  This is probably a fairly 
prolonged discussion, and the ARIN membership also needs to weigh in...

> > - Simple terms and conditions for contracts with registries
> > - Membership organizations for registries with term limits 
> >  for Board and advisory bodies
> > - Board diversity (meaning real world users)
> > - Competitive registries 
> > - ...
>
> i pretty much agree that arin should do these.  except ...
>
> iff we could get reasonable governance, i am not sure we need multiple
> rirs.  after all, the registries were just supposed to be bookkeepers.
> but i agree that competition is a good method of injecting some reality
> into the physics in the absense of other means.
>
> but i eagerly await the simplification of arin's ts&cs.  and get rid of
> being able to change them unilateraly and arbitrarily, and get rid the
> silly game about legacy rights, and a whole bunch of us might join.

I will note that this discussion is presently on nanog, and I am not 
certain that all of the ARIN Board members subscribe...  I will forward
your message to the Board, but would you prefer to take this to one of
the ARIN lists, or have a us setup a distinct list for this purpose, 
or something else?

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN