North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: ARIN is A Good Thing
Jim Browning wrote: >From: Ehud Gavron[SMTP:[email protected]]If you know this is fictitious then you must know what the real numbers are. I'm sure many of us would like to know the answer to that authoritatively. It would be quite illuminating. In watching the debates on DNS and IP allocation I am coming around to the conclusion that while we may have to live with some form of centralized control, perhaps even monopolistic, we must make sure that the controlling entity is accountable to the Internet community. If the entity is allowed to charge for the cost of services provided then it is *very* reasonable to expect that the revenue derived be openly disclosed and be required to be directly proportional to the actual costs involved. This suggests that the entity should be a not-for-profit corporation with an open charter that requires that service charges be commensurate to actual expenses (audited and reported each year publicly). Its board of directors unpaid and its officers limited in compensation. Also in the charter should be explicit requirements to use some percent of its fees to reduce the first year costs for Internet newbie corporations and/or other organizations to encourage experimentation and innovation. Those of us already established in the business can afford to pay a *little* extra for this purpose. I have yet to read the ARIN charter (sorry about that). If it reads like this then I'm all for it. However, the same argument applies to DNS and other services requiring centralized control. (BTW, a clear statement that the primary mission of the company is dedicated to providing quality and responsive service to the Internet is needed.) Under *no* circumstances can we allow a for-profit company to have unrestricted monopolistic control over *any* centralized Internet service. That is a recipe for disaster. Also, I do not think the government can do a job as well as an appropriately chartered not-for-profit company. However, I have *no* problem having the government in an appropriate form of supervisory or contributory role, perhaps with a guaranteed seat on the board of directors. Mike Gaddis Savvis Comunications - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|