[arin-ppml] Advisory Council Meeting Results - October 2010
Marty, I assure you there is no other implications whatsoever. There was a problem with the text in several AC member's mind and we were informed that the problem was about to be resolved. The motion to table was made, seconded and accepted unanimously. There really is nothing more to it than that.
On 10/13/10 5:06 PM, "Hannigan, Martin" <marty at akamai.com> wrote:
On 10/13/10 4:53 PM, "Sweeting, John" <john.sweeting at twcable.com> wrote:
> We fully understand your POV on this but as you state, it will take 6 months
> or more to get through all the process. We will be taking action on it at our
> Nov 18th meeting, the motion on the floor is to send it to last call. That is
> the motion we will deal with at our next meeting, I would not be overly
> alarmed at this and I fully support the decision to table the motion based on
> the information that was provided, in fact it was a unanimous decision. This
> in no way is a show of non-support from the AC, just the AC performing its
> mission in the prescribed manner. I can assure you that Bill is working with
> Staff for clarity on the addresses in question and has been asked to have
> final resolution prior to the AC Nov 18th meeting. Thanks.
So far, no clear legitimization as to why the AC would table something that
had strong consensus. This has far wider implications than just this