[arin-ppml] Proposal 99 -- IPv4 multihomed end-user minimum to /24

[Steve Bertrand]

Owen DeLong wrote:
> The following proposal has been sent to PPML before.  It is now on the
> AC docket.  There
> was, unfortunately, insufficient time to get it to the Dearborn meeting
> for adoption discussion
> outside of the petition process.
> 
> At this time, I would like to solicit any additional community feedback
> regarding changes that
> should be made to the proposal before asking the AC to place it on the
> next meeting agenda
> for adoption discussion.

To me, it seems as though there are many places within the proposal
where the term 'assignment' appears where I would expect the term
'allocation'.

This is slightly clouding my understanding of the policy proposal.

If the true intent of the proposer was to use 'assignment' in all cases,
please forgive me. If the terminology is indeed misrepresented, can that
be fixed?

Steve