[ppml] On proposing ARIN policy - was RE: More on Kremen/Cohen
Bill Darte
BillD at cait.wustl.edu
Tue Aug 7 09:36:06 EDT 2007
- Previous message: [ppml] More on Kremen/Cohen
- Next message: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-6 (was Re: More on Kremen/Cohen)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Of course everyone is encouraged to become involved with the ARIN public policy process and likewise everyone is encouraged to consider policy changes or additions that they think would improve their lot or the lot of the industry at large. I do suggest however that the ppml is the place to 'test' the reception that a policy proposal is likely to receive from the industry at large. It is, of course, industry consensus that is needed to move a proposal to the Board of Trustees for ratification. Making a formal proposal at the link provided by Stephen below, when a proposal first comes to mind will cause the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process (IRPEP http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html) to formally engage. Advisory Council members are then assigned to 'shepherd' these proposals through the IRPEP. Engaging the formal process is always available, but may not be in the best interest of the proposal author(s). If ideas are first introduced on the ppml then those ideas that receive significant negative feedback and/or constructive criticism on the ppml can be re-evaluated and insight might be gained on how to best craft a proposal for submission to ARIN and thus stand the best chance of being understandable, incorporate improvements proposed by a broader group, and be well-received by the industry. I encourage people with 'ideas' to submit them to the ppml and I encourage participants on the ppml to always give fair consideration to these ideas, offer constructive advice, and state clearly whether you are FOR or AGAINST these ideas. Thanks, Bill Darte ARIN Advisory Council > -----Original Message----- > From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On > Behalf Of Stephen Sprunk > Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 2:32 PM > To: Ted Mittelstaedt > Cc: ARIN PPML > Subject: Re: [ppml] More on Kremen/Cohen > > > Thus spake "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm at ipinc.net> > > So, did counsel ever comment on any past "shoot spammers > > dead on sight" proposals? There had to have been at least one! :-) > > I'm not aware of that having been formally proposed in the > past. You're > welcome to submit such a proposal (or any other) yourself if > you're curious > what the response would be; the directions are at: > > http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html > > In the past, counsel _has_ commented negatively on several > proposals; check > the PPML archives for "Staff Assessment" messages that are > sent out prior to > each meeting. > > S > > Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything > CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do." > K5SSS --Isaac Asimov > > > _______________________________________________ > This message sent to you through the ARIN Public Policy > Mailing List (PPML at arin.net). Manage your mailing list > subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml >
- Previous message: [ppml] More on Kremen/Cohen
- Next message: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-6 (was Re: More on Kremen/Cohen)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list