[arin-ppml] [arin-council] AC Role in Petitions
jmaimon at chl.com
Mon Apr 18 13:14:44 EDT 2011
Thanks for weighing in.
cja at daydream.com wrote:
> I really thought I would stay out of this discussion but when the word
> muzzled came up I really took offense.
I used that word since that is the only legitimate way that an AC member
cannot voice support for a petition, and I do not understand any other
way an AC member cannot be counted for a petition.
I do not understand what mechanism exists, if any, that would allow the
AC rules to alter the methodology the ARIN president uses to evaluate
I dont support any method of implementing this rule, either by mechanism
or by muzzling. I dont think AC rules should be a factor at all in a
I also dont think this rule is a good idea, that the scenario has never
happened and is not likely to, and that the scenario is one that
actually needs prevention has not been well sold at all.
> strongly about. It's not like you're a silent bunch. :-)
And I appreciate you all putting up with us.
> Also please note that it is stated in the minutes (link below) that the
> revised PDP is expected to have language regarding petitions that is
> similar to the AC standing rule.
This is the confusing part.
Either this rule is valid without PDP revision or as you are suggesting,
a revision is required to implement the rule.
I would not support any such revision, fwiw.
More information about the ARIN-PPML