[arin-ppml] The AC has a job to do with 2009-1, can you please help?

[Milton L Mueller]

David:
Another way of interpreting your useful research on policy term is that, in most cases, policies are immediate in effect and unlimited in duration. 

> > But lately I've hearing a lot of opposition to have a policy with a
> > sunset clause.  And at least the way it is being presented, it
> > isn't mealy opposition to a sunset clause on a Transfer policy,
> > but a more philosophical opposition to any policy with a sunset
> > clause.

What you're hearing from me is not a general opposition to having sunsets; they can be appropriate in certain circumstances. 

But a sunset on a transfer policy is disastrous. You are dealing with economic incentives fundamental to the operation of the industry and in a very sensitive transitional period; operators have to know what the ground rules are with respect to their ability to acquire and dispose of addresses during the migration/transitional period. The date for a sunset cannot be anything but utterly arbitrary, since we don't know how long this transition will take. The idea of lurching from one system to another and possibly back again based on an arbitrary, pre-specified date doesn't make any sense to me. 

--MM

> -----Original Message-----
> >
> > Then why do we allow for a Policy Term in the Policy
> > Template?   If all policies should be Permanent, which is what
> > people seem to be saying, should we just eliminate this from
> > the Policy Template?
> >
> > >From the Policy Template;
> >
> > ------
> > Policy term
> >
> > How long will the policy remain in effect? Is it intended to be
> > temporary, permanent, or renewable?
> > ------
> >
> > This seems to imply to me that at least some policies are
> > intended to have a term other than forever or until otherwised
> > removed by another policy action.
> 
> I did some analysis using the ARIN policy proposal archive, found at;
> 
> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/policy_proposal_archive.html
> 
> My analysis, on Google Docs
> 
> http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pMNgPs6H0qPX5y3F0TEOBeA
> 
> So, Most policies have a Policy Term: Permanent, with an Timetable for
> implementation: Immediate, which you would probably expect.
> 
> There are 8 policies with other Policy Terms; 3 have been Adopted, 1 is
> under discussion, and 4 have been Abandoned or Withdrawn
> 
> The other 78 Policies with a Permanent Policy Term; 26 have been Adopted,
> 11 is under discussion, and 41 have been Abandoned or Withdrawn
> 
> This gives Policies with a non-Permanent Policy Term a slightly better
> adoption rate than Policies with a Permanent Policy Term.
> 
> So, while Policies with a non-Permanent Policy Term are rare, about 10% of
> the Policy Proposals.  All Policies seem to have about the same rate of
> adoption, about 1/3, regardless of the Policy Term.
> 
> So I don't see any evidence that Temporary or Renewable Policies are some
> how bad on their face.
> 
> 
> 
> =======================================================
> David Farmer				     Email:	farmer at umn.edu
> Office of Information Technology
> Networking & Telecomunication Services
> University of Minnesota			     Phone:	612-626-0815
> 2218 University Ave SE			     Cell:		612-812-9952
> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029		     FAX:	612-626-1818
> =======================================================
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> 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.