[ppml] What do we do with 2002-6?
billd at cait.wustl.edu
Fri Feb 28 14:13:04 EST 2003
Begging the obvious answer....
I assume that you choose to leave the wording as is?
And, It seems to me that crafting any policy in the ARIN region solely to
be consistent with the other RIRs is not precisely the objective....and that
when objections to the wording of this policy suggest shortcomings to the
implementation or support of it, or subversive use of the policy beyond its
design are worthy of discussion.
Objecting to that discussion or the numbers or character of those discussing
a policy is not pertinent to the policy at hand and falls into the realm of
how policies are proposed and ratified. As I am intimately involved in that
process, I welcome your suggestions on how to improve this process at all
stages, in the meeting and on the list, in private or in public.
ARIN Advisory Council
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Woodcock [mailto:woody at pch.net]
> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 12:49 PM
> To: Bill Darte
> Cc: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: RE: [ppml] What do we do with 2002-6?
> > I assume by your comments that you are not in favor of
> option 2 of my
> > email....that is, to drop the proposal, but
> > I cannot determine whether you are in favor of word
> smithing the existing
> > policy statements that where enclosed or have an alternative.
> Changing the wording just causes it to diverge from the other RIR's
> policy, which defeats the entire purpose.
> Obviously the population of this list is significantly
> different, smaller,
> and more contentious than the attendees at the member
> meeting. Asking why
> everyone who attends the meetings doesn't have the patience
> to put up with
> the list seems to beg an obvious answer.
> The fact that a few people continue to have objections which
> were raised
> and dealt with to the satisfaction of the membership at the meeting
> doesn't seem terribly pertinent to me.
More information about the ARIN-PPML