On Jan 8, 2011, at 4:40 AM, Lee Howard wrote:
I think that's a bit of what we've been trying to do with the Best Current Operational Practices BoFs. We need a place where operators can discuss and document BCOPs.
While I think BCOPs (and BCOP BoFs) are a great idea, I guess the question is how can folks be assured that ARIN would follow a NANOG community-defined BCOP relating directly to ARIN operations. For example, if the NANOG community were to (reasonably) say "BCOP is to use IETF-defined standards for publishing and accessing resource registration data", I'd imagine ARIN might (reasonably) disagree and continue down the RWS path.
provision, there are things like public utilities commissions that (in
monopoly service provider acts in the public benefit when services are added/changed/deleted. My impression is that the various WGs and SIGs in
I don't think of BCOP as a subset of NANOG, but as an overlap of several communities, including NANOG and ARIN. Certainly ARIN is not bound by BCOP's findings (no one would be), but the AC and Board would take seriously a community-consensus best practice. I doubt ARIN would be surprised by any BCOP finding, given the involvement of several ARIN AC members in it. theory) ensure the the other RIRs
perform something similar to that function. There doesn't appear to be anything similar in the ARIN region.
Are you saying ARIN needs an ombudsman function to make sure the Board doesn't delay implementation of things the community wants while it figures out whether doing such things will prevent it from doing other things the community wants? I don't understand how this bee-watcher-watcher thing works. Lee