[ppml] Proposed Policy: 4-Byte AS Number Policy Proposal

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Fri Dec 16 02:29:10 EST 2005



--On December 15, 2005 5:22:16 AM -0800 "william(at)elan.net" 
<william at elan.net> wrote:

>
> We should not rely on the emergency powers - there is a reason why it
> is called emergency after all...
>
While I generally agree with you, I think it is reasonable to make policies
based on what seems to be reasonable time limits at the time the policy
is made.  If things change, then, it will either be an emergency, or,
it will get rectified through subsequent policy process.  If it is an
emergency, then, that is what the emergency powers are there for.  To
allow the BOD to deal with situations that come up and require action faster
than the policy process can act.

Having worked in actual emergency services (I was an ambulance driver/tech. 
for
a few years some years back), I can tell you that the definition of the
term emergency is very context sensitive.  In ARIN terms, the "emergency"
powers granted to the BOD are oriented towards a definition of emergency
as I conveyed above.  To a 911 dispatcher, the term "emergency" generally
means any situation for which you require a response from some form of
emergency services, preferably one in which said response is urgent.
For my current management, the definition of emergency is whatever customer
is yanking their chain today.

> My view is that we should avoid putting dates several years in the future
> in the policy proposals without very good reason to believe it can happen
> at the time proposal is made. It is better to leave deciding
> exact date to the discretion of ARIN and I think ARIN staff on its
> own can be bring this issue on the meeting & mail lists and base
> actual date on the consensus of the community.
>
I think we have good reason to believe that the timeframe proposed in
this policy is not only achievable, but, may well be necessary if we
have any hope of avoiding an emergency.  Having a deadline at the
discretion of the ARIN staff in this context is inappropriate and unfair
to the ARIN staff.  The community should set policy, and, delegating the
authority to do so to the staff, especially on something like this,
places them in an unfair hotseat.  It is important for the staff to
be able to apply these guidelines in a fair and equitable manner.
It is equally important for them to be able to show that the policy
is the result of community consensus and that there is a community
based process for making changes to it.  If we make the date at
their discretion, we make both of those things problematic for them.

> P.S. Do any of you still remember how many times date for discontinuing
> 6bone was moved?
>
The issuance of 32 bit ASNs is far less difficult than the decommissioning
of 6bone or the switch to IPv6.  It is not a fair comparison.  I do not 
believe
the date for the cessation of issuing 6bone addresses was moved.  I believe
that date was put in place and was adhered to.  Perhaps I remember wrong, 
but,
that's what I recall.

Owen
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20051215/f8783b22/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list