Hi,
El 27/4/19 1:35, "Jared Mauch" <ja...@puck.nether.net> escribió:
> On Apr 26, 2019, at 5:49 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
<jordi.pa...@consulintel.es> wrote:
>
> "AP stated that at the LACNIC meeting has discussed it and they dismissed
it as out of scope."
>
> LACNIC will have the first meeting where this topic will be discussed in
two weeks from now. How come an AC member can lie such way?
>
> If I'm an AC member, or any other similar team, I will make sure to
inform myself before stating something like that. In this case there is no
excuse, you just need to visit a web page for the LACNIC policy proposals,
similar in every RIR.
>
> Then I continue reading this: "AP stated that she believed that the
author was using ARIN to solve their problem."
>
> How come somebody that doesn't know me, can state that?
I’m not going to go in depth on the above comments. I’ve received at least
one off-list inquiry and I’ll also assume no explicit malice here, but as you
point out, it doesn’t smell tide fresh :)
-> And I'm also convinced there is not any malice, but is wrong doing this kind
of accusations or providing such false information.
The linked AC minutes page does say "These minutes are DRAFT. They have
been reviewed by the ARIN Advisory Council prior to posting. These minutes will
remain draft until they are reviewed and approved by the ARIN Advisory Council
at their next regularly scheduled meeting.”
I have pointed out another area that I consider suspect off-list, I will
set a calendar item to watch for new minutes to see if they are approved with
revisions. Hopefully there’s misunderstandings here, but I’m also not
confident as much of the conversation seems to have a disjoint with operational
realities. (This isn’t anything new with ARIN btw, they’ve long been concerned
about interacting with systems that are operational as doing that may mean
staffing for on call or other functions).
I’m hoping to see some updates/corrections to the text, so taking a
snapshot may be useful to watch for the corrections to the draft minutes.
-> If this is changed in the final minutes, then it will be very suspicious
that the AC is empowered to change something that in reality happened. I call
this manipulation and the community need to be aware of such things if it
happen. Minutes should reflect the reality of what happened in the meeting. I
really thing the right way is that they use a side note or whatever to ack it
was mistakes, lack of knowledge, lack of chat with the authors, whatever, but
never an alternation of the minutes.
I’m also debating if I spend the weekend with family or pinging everyone I
know on the AC (which is more than one) about these issues. Either way, I’ll
pick this up “soon” on my side.
I do consider that abuse of ARIN allocated resources (coke/pepsi for
numbering or other integers for AS4_PATH) something that ARIN can efforts to
enforce revocation in the case of violation of the RSA.
- Jared
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the
individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure,
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be
considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the
original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
