[ppml] Open discussion on Policy Proposal 2002-2

[Michael.Dillon at radianz.com]

>So in accordance with the ARIN Advisory Council's decision we
>are asking for further discussion on Policy Proposal 2002-2. 

One way to resolve this issue is to change the language so that it is 
clear that the IETF is the standards body. For instance:

"by the IANA in coordination with standards bodies, such as the IETF" ...
"Organisations such as the IETF, who describe experimental activities as 
part of their"
becomes:

"by the IANA in coordination with the IETF" ...
"The IETF describes experimental activities as part of their"

If we do this, what do we get?

1. We now have a clear relationship for experimental allocations rather 
than a vague and fuzzy one.
2. We now no longer have to decide whether or not a so-called "standards 
body" should be allowed to experiment on a case by case basis.
3. We no longer have any need to discuss the merits of any experiments 
because they will have already been discussed thoroughly in an open forum, 
namely the IETF. ARIN can focus solely on the resource allocation issues 
and defer all other issues and discussion to the IETF.
4. We won't ever have to discuss whether or not an experiment from a 
non-IETF standards body was fair enough or discussed openly enough or 
relevant enough since all experiments will be initiated by the most open 
standards body in existence.

Some people may argue that there is a case for accepting experimental 
requests from other standards bodies that work with a specific industry, 
for instance ITU-T and the cellular phone industry. However, the IETF is 
open enough to accomodate work that was begin in other forums, therefore 
this argument does not hold.

In other words, we aren't specifying that we want all work to be done 
under IETF auspices, merely that we want all work to pass through the 
IETF's review before it comes to ARIN so that ARIN can focus on being an 
RIR.

I'll leave it to someone else to do a detailed edit of the wording.

--Michael Dillon