[arin-ppml] Possible amendment to proposal 116

Hannigan, Martin mahannig at akamai.com
Mon Jul 26 15:57:01 EDT 2010

On 7/24/10 2:23 PM, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> wrote:

> I have received some comments on proposal 116 (currently under petition for
> discussion)
> in private email and want to get some community feedback on the idea.
> Basically, it has been suggested that rather than the list of example
> technologies and
> leaving the decision of what represents a valid transitional technology up to
> staff that
> the proposal be amended to have the BoT create a panel of experts which will
> meet
> monthly (likely via teleconference) to consider what should or should not
> qualify as a
> transitional technology for purposes of NRPM 4.10 et. seq.

The idea of the last /8 should be around transition and business v. uptake,
not process and vagueness. You've been writing policy that makes it harder
to conduBusiness doesn't handle vagueness very well. Can you explain why you
think that this would be better than an acceptable use list? Or perhaps the
author can explain it himself?

BTW, from your actual proposal:

> e. etc.


> My current inclination is to think that is a lot of extra process and rather
> heavy compared
> to the need at hand, but, the author makes a compelling enough case i private
> that
> I thought the matter was worthy of additional discussion in public.

See above...

[ clip ]

> Finally, I would like to encourage any of you who think proposal 116 merits
> discussion
> by the community, even if you do not support it as written, to support the
> petition so that
> we get the opportunity to discuss it and refine it in Atlanta. Remember,
> supporting the
> petition merely means that you want to give the community the opportunity to
> discuss
> the matter. It does not necessarily mean that you support the proposal.

This is still not a good reason to support this proposal. It falls VERY
short in reach and in depth. It's similar to Joe Maimon's proposal which was
declined in the petition process and I am sorry, but I think that this
should be declined as well.



More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list