[ppml] Directory Services - Take 2

[Azinger, Marla]

Although my background knowledge of why this is really needed...I tend to lean towards this being taken out of the proposed policy.  For me, the points below are what I stand by as support for the deletion of this "entry" in the proposed proposal.

-Dictation of implementation detail that doesnt belong in policy text
-It involves manual labor and cost that can be avoided

Marla


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net]On Behalf Of Alec
H. Peterson
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 9:52 AM
To: Bill Woodcock; Hannigan, Martin
Cc: ppml at arin.net
Subject: RE: [ppml] Directory Services - Take 2


--On June 10, 2005 9:42:02 -0700 Bill Woodcock <woody at pch.net> wrote:

>     > What percentage of requests for data are CD-ROM based?
>
> Presumably a very small number, which would seem to make it inefficient
> to  keep a mechanism in place to serve a small number of potential
> requests  which could just as well be served via the normal mechanism.

This raises another point, isn't putting that kind of detail in a policy 
statement really unnecessary?  Doesn't that fall under the category of an 
implementation detail?

ALec