[ppml] Policy Proposal 2004-3 point of order
marla_azinger at eli.net
Tue Apr 19 10:13:01 EDT 2005
Well if you interpreted it to mean "no" in the past. Then you were interpreting it wrong (hence the clarification). The execution of this policy has never denied it from either a company that did or did not intend to make them go "public".
From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net]On Behalf Of Houle, Joseph D (Joe), CMO
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 6:55 AM
To: ppml at arin.net
Subject: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2004-3 point of order
This may be more of a point of order, then a technical comment. This proposal has been positioned as a clarification not a change in policy. And I expect the result of the "vote" yesterday was primarily driven by that assertion.
Let's ask a question and see how one might interpret policy under the old wording and new wording.
Question: Will ARIN provide globally unique addresses to an entity that has no intention of advertising those addresses out to the Internet or making those addresses reachable from the Internet.
Old wording: I suggest most folks would interpret the wording as "no".
New wording: I suggest most would interpret the new wording as "yes".
This sounds like a change in policy, not a clarification.
I'm not sure the mandate from yesterday's vote is to change the policy.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML