[arin-ppml] Microsoft receives court approval for transfer as agreed with ARIN
bensons at queuefull.net
Wed Apr 27 17:28:36 EDT 2011
On Apr 27, 2011, at 3:56 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> On Apr 27, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>> Perhaps that is what the community
>> wants, or perhaps the community needs to re-iterate that these three
>> points are not negotiable.
> I suspect that if those points aren't as negotiable as ARIN staff has interpreted them to be, ARIN will rapidly cease to have any relevance. Is that what you're after?
On one hand, in this instance I think that the outcome is generally what should have happened. (Except for the lack of transparency into negotiated LRSAs.) If ARIN had taken an overly-hard stance, it would have damaged ARIN and the community as well as Nortel and Microsoft.
On the other hand, I can't help but be concerned when policy is interpreted so loosely. It undermines the value of an open, transparent, community-driven policy development process. (We don't have to "get it right" because staff will just "fix" it for us in implementation...) I think it's pretty clear that we must have a conversation about bringing policy in-line with implementation, and vice versa, and (as members and/or policymakers) take more responsibility for ARIN's actions.
More information about the ARIN-PPML