Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes - 02 September 1998 [Archived]


Here in the Vault, information is published in its final form and then not changed or updated. As a result, some content, specifically links to other pages and other references, may be out-of-date or no longer available.



  • John Curran
  • Kim Hubbard
  • Don Telage
  • Ken Fockler
  • Scott Bradner
  • Doug Humphrey
  • Dennis Molloy

The meeting was called to order at 4:10 pm. Doug Humphrey joined the meeting at 4:15 pm.

The first agenda item was the proposed bylaw changes. Ken proceeded to summarize these changes to the bylaws. The phrase “President of the Board of Trustees” has been changed to Chairman of the Board in all noted places. The most substantial changes are in Article VIII, Advisory Council. Points addressed include telephonic meetings, recommended removal of AC members by the AC, the actual removal of the AC members by the BoT, definition of a quorum, notice of meetings and waivers.

Ken inquired about electronic voting for the AC and Scott mentioned that he has used electronic voting in other situations. Dennis, ARIN counsel, noted that electronic voting is not allowed by Virginia law. He further explained that if there is electronic voting, there must be a unanimous vote and everyone must vote, conditions which are not easily met. Both Doug and Scott pointed out that email voting is good for situations in which there is no dissension. The voters must have had the opportunity previously to participate in a forum which allowed for active discussion of the issue.

Action item: Dennis is to research the above issue to see if there is a way to do electronic voting and to propose wording for such voting if there is.

Ken continued the review of the bylaw changes and referred to sections 4 and 5 under Article VIII. The proposed changes substantially alter these sections and section 4 is removed in entirety. Dennis will need to add the actual process for elections, terms of office, nominations and vacancies. John noted that Section 10 was losing context and should be amended to include “AC Chairman” as the opening words. Section 12 refers to the removal of AC members by the Trustees with or without cause at either a regular meeting or a special meeting called for that purpose.

Ken stated that he would like the new wording and clarification of Section 5 in place before voting on acceptance of the bylaw changes. Counsel will send the new version of Section 5 to complete the proposed changes and voting on these changes will be postponed until all the amendments are complete.

Action item: Dennis is to update the proposed bylaws and send them to the board mailing list.

The next agenda item concerned the Registry Document from the Geneva conference in July 1998. RIPE had asked ARIN to host the document on the ARIN website, but the IANA had already produced a draft. A new version will be worked on by the registries.

ARIN Member Meeting. The agenda for the meeting on October 16, which will be held at the Microsoft Campus in Seattle, is almost complete. Kim asked the Trustees if there were any items they would like included on the agenda. She also stated that she had heard from the Mexico NIC who want to add LIR’s as an agenda item. Kim has asked them for a specific proposal on what they want to see happen. Kim will ask them for more details and pass all this information on to the AC. Some discussion ensued about whether LIR’s or NIC’s were being considered. It was noted that both probably need to be discussed.

Kim stated that she is hearing many comparisons between ARIN, RIPE and APNIC. In order to determine if the members want to follow RIPE’s policies, feedback from the members via the AC is needed. John posed a question about ARIN and the other registries concerning how much harmonization should ARIN have with the other registries. It was decided that this discussion would continue on the BoT mailing list.

John also raised a question in regards to ARIN implementing allocation policies. Should the allocation policies be done independently by ARIN or should ARIN confer with the other registries? Kim and Scott will work on the actual posing of this question.

Board Elections. The terms of the Trustees are as follows: Ken Fockler has a one year term (he is completing the term of Raymundo Vega), Doug Humphrey (who is completing the term of Randy Bush) and Don Telage have two year terms and Scott Bradner and John Curran both have three year terms. After this introductory period, all terms will be three full years. A note will be sent to the AC announcing that Ken’s term is about to expire and the nomination process for a new Board of Trustees member should begin.

The resignation of Karl Denninger has left one vacancy on the AC. The AC will be asked if they would like to fill this vacancy immediately or wait until December when the terms of the five AC members with a one year term will expire.

Dennis Molloy’s letters will be discussed on the mailing list.

The next agenda item concerned a query from Jon Postel. Does ARIN wish to endorse the bylaws of the new organization? The IETF choose to endorse these bylaws. Since negotiations are still underway with IANA and NSI, Kim will send a note to Jon stating that ARIN will wait to see the results of the pending negotiations.

Dennis’ memo will be online. Kim informed the BoT about the proposed meeting between ARIN, RIPE and APNIC. APNIC wanted to hold the meeting in Australia, but a more central location in Hawaii proved to be amenable to all the parties.

The meeting adjourned at 5:30pm.


Here in the Vault, information is published in its final form and then not changed or updated. As a result, some content, specifically links to other pages and other references, may be out-of-date or no longer available.