[PDB User-discuss] [PDB-announce] PeeringDB survey with regard to the future of PeeringDB

[Hannigan, Martin]

[ clip ]


> On Aug 7, 2015, at 10:26 AM, Dave Temkin <dave at temk.in> wrote:


> 
> Dan's point stands. The current "Board" of PDB is barely representative of the user base that relies on it and is in no way representative of the (meaningful) donor base.


I selected the independence option. I feel pretty good about the current leadership representing the interests of everyone. 

The only way to insure that PDB does have majority representation is to insure it’s independence by incorporating and holding an election. 

At NANOG 64 the current temporary board was vetted and an election target was announced:

"The initial, interim board was announced during the Peering Track of NANOG 64, June 3, 2015. An election by the PeeringDB community to replace the initial board will be held prior to August 1st, 2016.“


The vast majority in the room supported it. I’m open to it, but I'm not convinced a change of course is needed. 


Thanks,

Martin Hannigan
AS 20940 / AS 32787