Re: Shaping the Future of ICP-2: Community Input Extended to December 2024

[John Curran <jcurran () arin net>]

> On Nov 20, 2024, at 10:25 AM, William Herrin <bill () herrin us> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 6:18 AM John Curran <jcurran () arin net> wrote:
> > The ASO AC process is completely open to input from any interested
> > party, as there is a wide range of communities that may want to provide
> > input into the process.  In some cases, communities may coalesce
> > around a single submission and in others (such as I would expect among
> > NANOGers) there’s likely to end up being a variety of different views
> > submitted by those interested in this topic.
> >
> > Nothing precludes you from having as much “discussion and debate” as
> > you need for the germination of your ideas, but you do not get to constrain
> > others as to how they wish to develop & submit their own ideas into the process.
>
> Hi John,
>
> It seems to me that regulatory capture is just a little bit easier if
> the feedback mechanism rewards groups who coalesce around a single
> submission and doesn't intrinsically facilitate broad discussion of
> the proffered ideas. But, as you say: that's just my opinion.

Bill - 

I am not sure that there is any reward at all for groups that coalesce around a single submission; i.e., at the end of 
the day, a good idea is a good idea regardless of source.

As for regulatory capture, I imagine it could be considered a risk but having a single body (in this case, the ASO AC) 
digest all the input received is necessary of a process that is both global in scope and converges in reasonable time.  
 I’ll admit that it does place significant faith in the capabilities of those elected to the ASO AC, but from what I’ve 
seen to date, that faith is indeed well-placed. 

Thanks,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers