[arin-ppml] Abandonment of 103/104

On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Sweeting, John
<john.sweeting at> wrote:
> I just want to share some of the information that was not
>provided in the explanation posted but was discussed at
>the AC's meeting and will be part of the minutes. The first
>motion was to Accept Proposal 103 on the docket. After
>much discussion it was voted down 5 For, 7 Against,
>1 Abstention (there were 2 AC members absent). The
>main reasoning was that by putting it on the docket
>with the intention of major revisions, the AC was aborting
>the author's (and community's) right to petition. [...]  David
>and/or Scott should be working with you (and others) to try
>and work out the flaws. I have seen a lot of back and forth
>on this list so it seems to be what is happening. We, the
>AC, have no intentions of dropping this and I just wanted to
> state that on this list.

Thanks John. I appreciate the insight. I would like to see Scott's
proposal move forward. I'd also like to see some alternatives.

Though I haven't yet decided, I will likely petition 103. I find that
ideas germinate better in the presence of direct competition. Should
one of the alternatives prove superior, an active 103 would, at the
least, provide a useful yardstick by which the alternative is

By the way, if there's anyone out there who would be willing to
support a petition to move 103 forward to the discussion and
presentation phase, I'd love to hear from you privately. I'd hate to
post a petition only to hear the crickets chirp.

As I see it, you don't have to support adopting the proposal to
support a petition. I know I won't push for adoption of a proposal
unless it has gained consensus. To support a petition, you just have
to believe that the proposal should move forward to formal discussion,
and be presented for critical analysis to the wider policy community
at an ARIN meeting.

Bill Herrin

William D. Herrin ................ herrin at  bill at
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004