[arin-ppml] Advisory Council Meeting Results - January 2011

The overwhelming sentiment on the PPML for both the PP129 and PP130 was opposed.
And, most of that sentiment reflected the tradition of the world based upon RFC 2050's needs-based assignments.

BTW the author is correct in that PP130 is not as directly associated with needs based assignment, since it simply reserves space for future use of ASN holders. However, the AC believed that in a time of scarcity, such reserves would preclude others with immediate needs from acquiring those resource and was thus tantamount to the same problem.


-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Wendel [mailto:aaron at]
Sent: Fri 2/4/2011 5:03 PM
To: Bill Darte; 'William Herrin'; arin-ppml at
Subject: RE: [arin-ppml] Advisory Council Meeting Results - January 2011
I would question whether that's a valid reason to abandon a proposal.  It's
my understanding that if one doesn't like the way ARIN does something the
proper channel for change is the PDP.  If the AC is going to abandon those
proposals because "it's not the way we do it" then what IS the proper





From: arin-ppml-bounces at [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at] On
Behalf Of Bill Darte
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 9:35 PM
To: William Herrin; arin-ppml at
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Advisory Council Meeting Results - January 2011



So in the case of PP 130 for example.  The PP was abandoned because it
didn't conform to the communities principle of needs-based assignments.
And, that was the stated reason. 

A paragraph to say that would be no clearer, nor would it make the author
feel any better.
I suppose we could state the obvious, that we appreciate the author's
involvement and willingness to engage in the PDP. 

We all do appreciate that and I guess we should state it....but somehow I
believe you might find fault with that statement...and perhaps this
one....considering each disingenuous.


-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at on behalf of William Herrin
Sent: Thu 2/3/2011 8:18 PM
To: arin-ppml at
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Advisory Council Meeting Results - January 2011

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:31 PM, David Farmer <farmer at> wrote:
> Yes, but the current policy (2009-8) activated today with IANA exhaustion,
> it would have taken emergency action to prevent that.  Or are you
> we should go down to three months, back to twelve months, and then back
> to three months again?  Honestly, that doesn't sound like a good idea to


That might have been a good reason for bouncing it. But "there isn't
time" is  disingenuous. There's always time.

It sets me off when a member of the AC (or the AC as a whole)
announces that there isn't time for something. Not enough time to get
this through the process. Too many proposals, not enough time to work
on this one. Call it a pet peeve.

Many of you are past your first terms. If you couldn't figure out how
to make time, you shouldn't have run for reelection. You know: lead,
follow or ::get out of the way::. Those of you past your first terms
did run for reelection. So now it's just a wussy excuse.

This is part of another irritant for me as well: I find the brusque
way the AC disposes of proposals it decides to abandon to be
disrespectful to their authors. A proposal author has spent  hours
behind the scenes carefully crafting language, researching process and
writing justification. When you make the decision instead of leaving
it to consensus, simple courtesy demands at least a paragraph from
each of you explaining why the proposal wasn't good enough.


William D. Herrin ................ herrin at  bill at
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
Please contact info at if you experience any issues.


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG -
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3420 - Release Date: 02/03/11

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>