[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 104: Multiple Discrete Networks forproposal 103

[michael.dillon at bt.com]

100% opposed to this type of policy proposal and I believe that we
should not even entertain a discussion of the merits of the text of such
a proposal. In fact, I would like to see the AC make a statement to make
it clear that such policy proposals are not acceptable and will not be
put forward for discussion in future.

The purpose of the PPML is to discuss proposed changes to policy.

This proposal wants us to discuss proposed changes to a proposal which
is not yet policy.

This is highly confusing, because now it is unclear whether any comments
regarding proposal 103 include, or exclude the proposed changes in
proposal 104.

I would rather see a complete new proposal that competes with proposal
103, as we have done in the past although that is not really optimal.

The fact is that during the discussion of any policy proposal, changes
and additions are suggested without creating additional formal
proposals. Then, the authors generally incorporate some form of the
changes and additions and propose a new changed text for the original
proposal. At all times, there is only the one proposal under discussion.
Even though I prefer succint proposals, I would rather see a proposal
with additional clauses which can be neatly cut off if they do not have
support, than to muddy the waters the way that this one does.

--Michael Dillon