On Mar 25, 2014, at 5:04 PM, Randy Bush <ra...@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
