[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2009-1: Transfer Policy ?Revisedandforwarded to the Board

Chris Grundemann cgrundemann at gmail.com
Thu May 7 11:27:31 EDT 2009

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 15:58, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> On May 6, 2009, at 1:27 AM, <michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote:
>>> The sunset clause was about building trust.  It was about
>>> finding a compromise that brought everyone under the same
>>> tent.  It was a promise to the unsure that there would be a
>>> top-to-bottom review.
>> Wait a minute, that is not a sunset clause, that is a review
>> date. A sunset clause says that something will end on that
>> date, period. No review. No renewal. Nothing.
> No... The difference between a sunset clause and a review
> clause is the default outcome of such a review.
> If there is a review clause, it just means that a review has
> to be conducted, but, absent consensus to do something as
> a result of that review, nothing changes.
> If there is a sunset clause, then, absent a review and consensus,
> the policy expires and we return to the previous state before the
> policy was enacted.  This default return is what was expected
> by the proponents of the sunset clause and the members of the
> community that accepted the proposal on the basis of it containing
> a sunset clause.
> Personally, I feel that the interaction between the existing
> sunset clause and the board's decision to implement on
> a much faster timetable than the AC anticipated created
> a difficult conundrum for the AC. There were no good options
> open to the AC under the circumstance.

IMHO, removing the sunset was a "no good option" but there were/are
others; extending the sunset date (to 5 years instead of 3, or to 3
years after IANA depletion, etc) would have been a much better course
of action since that clause was a major factor in the community
consensus around 2008-6.

>> If you want some kind of policy that includes a built-in reveiew
>> date then please say so in plain English and don't pussyfoot
>> around with redefining the meaning of words and pompous
>> language. Instead of attaching an explanation of what you mean,
>> hone the wording of the policy until it is clear and
>> and unambiguous.
> The desire was to force a review date with a strong prejudice
> for terminating the policy unless there was consensus to continue
> it. That's what a sunset clause effectively does.
>>> These events have left me smarter though.  I now realize
>>> sunset provisions don't work.
>> Yes they do. After the sunset date, the policy or law is no
>> longer operative.
> Sunset provisions can work, but, the processing of these
> two policies (2008-6 and 2009-1) has identified a number
> of areas for further evaluation of the ARIN PDP which I
> believe the AC and the board will be working on in the
> near future and for some time.
>>> The promise of a comprehensive
>>> review, on a timetable, has already been broken.
>> That is not a sunset clause.
> A sunset clause is ONE mechanism for ensuring such a thing
> and setting a particular default outcome. There are others with
> different default outcomes.
> Owen
> _______________________________________________
> 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.

Chris Grundemann

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list