[arin-ppml] would you support a proposal to tighten usage documentation requirements?
bicknell at ufp.org
Wed Sep 17 21:48:37 EDT 2008
In a message written on Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 05:39:24PM -0700, Jo Rhett wrote:
> 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.
There is a generic idea that has been floating around for some time
to create a companion to the NRPM. It has been proposed as a
separate document to provide operational details like you describe,
or as an "annotated" version of the NRPM.
I would be much happier if we could get the community, and then by
extension ARIN behind this idea. I do believe staff could provide
some additional information in several areas, and a prime one is
the one you mentioned, what forms of documentation are acceptable?
I think having staff publish a representative, but perhaps not all
encompassing set of examples could help a lot of people understand
the policies and how they are implemented.
The problem with putting this sort of information in policy is we
neither want to tie staff's hands by having the policy specify
something that is out of date or otherwise inappropriate nor do we
want to have to put trivial changes (e.g. replace document xyz with
document abc) through the policy process. For both of these reasons
I am skeptical that the policy process is the right place for this
sort of information.
I would urge you to use ppml to build community support for the
idea and some specific recommendations on areas where this information
should augment the NRPM, and then submit that output to the suggestion
Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ARIN-PPML