> 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.
> 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.
... JG
$quoted_author = "Joe Greco" ;
Using the organization to justify the need for the organization is
circular reasoning.
I would have thought the role ARIN (and the other RIRs) has to play is clear
from it's charter (registration of number resources to ensure uniqueness and
fair allocation of a finite resource).
And the need for someone or something to serve that role is best highlighted
when it fails (e.g. duplicate ASes in RIPE and ARIN last year).
Anyways, the non-answers to these questions are very illuminating.
Feel free to not deploy IPv6. Or get a /48 from a tunnel broker or your ISP.
You have plenty of options, just one of which is provider independent space
from ARIN.
cheers
Marty
> > 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.
> > 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.
This is an answer though. The vast majority of people who need address space in
North America are ARIN members. These ARIN members are happy with the current
organisation. If the set of people who need IP address tend towards being happy
with the current system, there is no reason to change it for a new system,
which they may not be happy with.
The vast majority of people who need address space in North America
are ARIN members. These ARIN members are happy with the current
organisation. If the set of people who need IP address tend towards
being happy with the current system, there is no reason to change it
for a new system, which they may not be happy with.
not a useful argument. it amounts to the vast majority of the rich are
happy being rich.
randy
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
This is an answer though. The vast majority of people who need address space in
North America are ARIN members. These ARIN members are happy with the current
organisation. If the set of people who need IP address tend towards being happy
with the current system, there is no reason to change it for a new system,
which they may not be happy with.
Actually, I don't believe that is completely true. The vast majority of address
space in North America is given to ARIN members. However, the vast
majority of people who need address space in North America are end
users, most of whom get their address space from ARIN members or
descendent LIRs from ARIN members. In some cases, they are end
users who get address space from ARIN but are not ARIN members.
Some end users are ARIN members, but, I do not believe the majority
of them are.
I'm not saying there is anything wrong with it being this way, just that
it is an important distinction in address consumption vs. membership.
Owen