[ppml] the "other" policy proposals

Bill Woodcock woody at pch.net
Fri Apr 6 22:34:51 EDT 2007

    > http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2007_1.html
    > http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2007_2.html
    > http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2007_3.html
    > For as much as is on the surface, but against if the method appears in WhoIs.

There's no requirement for it to do so, and I agree, that would be an 
ill-conceived implementation.

    > This is a dumb question, but these are to be implemented in order, 1, 
    > 2, 3, and if 1 is not approved 2 fails, if 2 fails, 3 fails, right?

Correct.  If 1 fails, we will immediately withdraw 2 and 3, since they 
would no longer serve any function.

    > Will ARIN match the security mechanism used in the response to the 
    > security of the object?  If a POC uses PGP, ARIN responds with PGP, 
    > if the POC uses X509, will ARIN?

That would be the sensible thing to do, it seems to me.  We didn't want to 
get into over-specifying how all this should be done.  The idea of the 
proposal was to define a set of minimum needs, rather than detail an exact 
implementation, which we feel can better be arrived at by staff 
interacting with membership in the real world.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list