[arin-ppml] would you support a proposal to tighten usage documentation requirements?

Jo Rhett jrhett at svcolo.com
Wed Sep 17 22:37:40 EDT 2008

One of the goals is to give us something to point customers to  
existing policy.  Hiding it behind ARIN doesn't affect the bad  
description "No. of hosts" that exists in the NRPM today.

On Sep 17, 2008, at 6:23 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> I would rather expand upon this in the ACSP and put it into the
> operational documentation that stuff it into the NRPM.
> Just my $0.02.
> Owen
> On Sep 17, 2008, at 5:39 PM, Jo Rhett wrote:
>> I'd like to get some feedback on the following.  Just tell me if you
>> think it's a good idea or not.  The specifics would have to be
>> hammered out, obviously.  This is a "thumbs up/down" poll.
>> Problem: right now the NRPM doesn't document explicitly what
>> information to provide to document usage information.  Many non-ARIN
>> people read it and get the impression that saying "I have 50 hosts"  
>> is
>> enough to justify their usage.  Section says "No. of
>> Internal Machines".
>> Talking with ARIN staff, they agree that explicit examples might be a
>> good thing to have in the book.  They do *not* feel that limiting the
>> input to a specific format would go over well, but it would certainly
>> make their job easier.
>> I therefore propose to write up a policy proposal with the following
>> goals.  Tell me whether or not you'd support it.  I hate pissing
>> upwind, so I'm only going to spend time doing this if enough of you
>> guys and gals think this is a good idea.
>> 1. Replace section with some explicit examples of  
>> acceptable
>> input.
>> 2. Change the NRPM wording to say that any documentation provided  
>> that
>> doesn't match the supplied guidelines will be evaluated on a case-by-
>> case basis.
>> NOTE: This would not change ARIN acceptance guidelines.  This would
>> simply better document the existing evaluation process.
>>   -or-
>> A. Codify the acceptable format(s) in a way which is easy for us to
>> machine generate.  (starting with the formats we use today so no
>> change is necessary)
>> B. Change the NRPM to require submission in one of the documented
>> formats.
>> NOTE: This *would* change ARIN acceptance guidelines by limiting the
>> acceptable submission format.  It would not otherwise change the
>> acceptance guidelines.
>> Frankly, I'm in favor of the latter (alphabetic one) though that will
>> come as no surprise to anyone who knows me.  But I'd happily write up
>> and support the former (numeric) proposal because it would vastly
>> improve the current situation.
>> And before you reply, repeat after me "Neither of these proposals
>> would actually change whether or not a given usage would be  
>> acceptable
>> for a given allocation size."
>> -- 
>> Jo Rhett
>> senior geek
>> Silicon Valley Colocation
>> Support Phone: 408-400-0550
>> _______________________________________________
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

Jo Rhett
senior geek

Silicon Valley Colocation
Support Phone: 408-400-0550

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list