[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Sunset 2008-6 on schedule

Ted Mittelstaedt tedm at ipinc.net
Fri Mar 20 17:50:36 EDT 2009

The conference committees are equivalent to the ARIN PPML.

Changing a policy proposal that the PPML has given consensus
on is basically equivalent to a line-item veto.  That's
the real slippery slope IMHO.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Schnizlein [mailto:schnizlein at isoc.org] 
> Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 1:09 PM
> To: Ted Mittelstaedt
> Cc: 'Owen DeLong'; arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Sunset 2008-6 on schedule
> Really touching the line of off-topic -
> Referring to ARIN's policy development process as 
> "legislation" is a slippery slope I do not recommend walking. 
>  However, the frequent huge difference between what goes into 
> a Conference Committee and what comes out does not support 
> the description: "unheard of".
> Here is the part that gets back in the vicinity of the topic: 
> the discussions of transfer proposals have been dynamic to 
> say the least, not just in  ARIN but in other RIRs also.  It 
> seems premature to discuss changes that have not been 
> published yet, regardless of Owen's view of private 
> conversations with staff.
> John
> On 2009Mar20, at 3:53 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> > Sunset clauses are VERY COMMONLY used to get controversal 
> and somewhat 
> > objectionable public policy past the voters.  There's 
> almost certainly 
> > people who would have changed their position on the 
> original proposal 
> > if it lacked a sunset clause - otherwise a sunset clause 
> would never 
> > have been put in it in the first place.  To pass such "legislation"
> > with
> > a clause and then remove the clause immediately after passage is 
> > unheard of.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list