44/8

[dougb at dougbarton.us (Doug Barton)]

On 8/27/19 8:52 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Jul 26, 2019, at 21:59 , Doug Barton <dougb at dougbarton.us 
>> <mailto:dougb at dougbarton.us>> wrote:
>>
>> Responding to no one in particular, and not representing views of any 
>> current or former employer ...
>>
>> I find all of this hullabaloo to be ... fascinating. A little 
>> background to frame my comments below. I was GM of the IANA in the 
>> early 2000's, I held a tech license from 1994 through 2004 (I gave it 
>> up because life changed, and I no longer had time; but I still have 
>> all my toys, err, I mean, gear); and I have known two of the ARDC 
>> board members and one of the advisors listed at 
>> https://www.ampr.org/amprnet/ for over fifteen years. I consider them 
>> all friends, and trust their judgement explicitly. One of them I've 
>> known for over 20 years, and consider a close and very dear friend.
>>
>> There have been a number of points over the past 30 years where anyone 
>> who genuinely cared about this space could have used any number of 
>> mechanisms to raise concerns over how it's been managed, and by whom. 
>> I cannot help but think that some of this current sound and fury is an 
>> excuse to express righteous indignation for its own sake. The folks 
>> involved with ARDC have been caring for the space for a long time. 
>> From my perspective, seeing the writing on the wall regarding the 
>> upcoming friction around IPv4 space as an asset with monetary value 
>> increasing exponentially, they took quite reasonable steps to create a 
>> legal framework to ensure that their ability to continue managing the 
>> space would be protected. Some of you may remember that other groups, 
>> like the IETF, were taking similar steps before during and after that 
>> same time frame. Sure, you can complain about what was done, how it 
>> was done, etc.; but where were you then? Are you sure that at least 
>> part of your anger isn't due to the fact that all of these things have 
>> happened over the last 20 years, and you had no idea they were happening?
>>
> 
> Certainly part of my anger is that I did not know some of them were 
> happening.

Fair enough.

> However, most of my anger is around the fact that:
> 1.It never in a million years would have occurred to me that these 
> people who I also consider friends and also trust explicitly
> would take this particular action without significant prior (and much 
> wider) consultation with the amateur radio community.
> 
> 2.I believe this was done quietly and carefully orchestrated 
> specifically to avoid any risk of successful backlash by the time
> the community became aware of this particular intended action.

I have actually been in this exact same position, of knowing that a 
thing is the right thing to do, but also knowing that doing it would 
create a poop-storm. I don't know if your analysis is right or not, but 
if I had been in their shoes I probably would have done the same thing.

> If you want to say shame on us for trusting these people and not 
> noticing the severe corporate governance problems with ARDC until
> they took this particular action, then I suppose thatâ??s a fair comment.

No, I am not attempting to shame anyone (although I admit my message was 
a bit testy). My point is simply that all of this after-the-fact 
griping, in the absence of any proven harm, is probably not as much 
about the thing as it is about self-culpability in what lead up to the 
thing. But as humans it's hard to direct that anger towards ourselves, 
so it gets directed outwardly. So, no shame, as it's a very human 
reaction. But a little more self-awareness would not be out of place.

>> So let's talk a little about what "stewardship" means. Many folks have 
>> complained about how ARDC has not done a good job of $X function that 
>> stewards of the space should perform. Do you think having some money 
>> in the bank will help contribute to their ability to do that? Has 
>> anyone looked at how much of the space is actually being used now, and 
>> what percentage reduction in available space carving out a /10 
>> actually represents? And nowadays when IPv6 is readily available 
>> essentially "for free," how much is the amateur community actually 
>> being affected by this?
>>
> All of those are good questions. I donâ??t have data to answer any of them 

So shouldn't actually looking at the space to determine if any real harm 
was done be the next step?

Doug