[ppml] Directory Services - Take 2

Azinger, Marla marla_azinger at eli.net
Fri Jun 10 14:30:42 EDT 2005

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


-----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?


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list