[ppml] Policy Proposal 2002-3: Micro-Assignments for Multihomed Networks
owen at delong.com
Mon Sep 29 13:52:22 EDT 2003
I'm reposting the following from private email with permission from
> --On Monday, September 29, 2003 11:15 AM -0600 "Alec H. Peterson"
> <ahp at hilander.com> wrote:
>> --On Monday, September 29, 2003 10:10 AM -0700 Owen DeLong
>> <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>> Well, regardless of how long it takes, both micro-assignments and
>>> micro-allocations are needed. As such, I would ask your advice on which
>>> of the following alternatives you would think has the best chance:
>>> 1. Modify 2002-3 to include allocation and assignment.
>>> 2. Pass 2002-3 as is. Modify 2003-15 to encompass all of ARIN for
>>> FWIW, "through the policy process" is a tautological answer, given that
>>> the fundamental question was "what is the policy process for adding an
>>> amendment to a proposed policy". Admittedly, I did not state it so
>>> clearly the first time.
>> It is difficult to say which would be easiest Owen. We've been working
>> on trying to get something like this passed for years, but it hasn't
>> happened because there are such strong views on both sides of the issue.
>> We're trying to come up with a compromise, and I think trying to get
>> everything you want in one proposal is a mistake, because it just won't
>> As far as amendments work, there isn't a way to do such things without
>> just changing the proposal. And such a change would be material enough
>> that it would require yet another public policy meeting for full public
>> vetting before it passes. So if you do want to amend the current
>> proposal to also include allocations then no micro-anything proposal
>> would pass until after the _next_ pp meeting at the earliest.
Based on this advice, I will now advocate that we should pass 2002-3 without
amendment. Further, I will advocate amending 2003-15 to encompass all of
ARIN and recommend that it be passed at the next public policy meeting with
just that modification. I will vote against any sub-region specific policy,
not because I think it is a bad policy, but, because I think it sets a bad
precedent. i think 2003-15 is a good policy if it is expanded to encompass
all of ARIN. I think sub-regional specific policies are just not a good
idea in general.
To be fair to Alec, he disagrees with me about 2003-15 and feels that we
pass it now as is and work on expanding it to the rest of ARIN later. I am
not sure whether his reposting permission included his specific comments,
on this, so I have not included them here. If he asks me to, I will
post them. I certainly have no objection to him posting them. He makes a
good argument for 2003-15 and I agree with his points. Alec, you are
also welcome to post any portion of my reply that you consider appropriate.
More information about the ARIN-PPML