[arin-ppml] FW: Proposal: Clarification of draft policy 2009-3 (ARIN-prop-135)
john.sweeting at gmail.com
Fri Feb 18 19:38:13 EST 2011
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 5:46 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Kevin Kargel <kkargel at polartel.com>
> >> IMHO a policy that *allows* return of blocks to IANA upon
> >> request by IANA would be ok. I am not in favor of policy
> >> that *requires* return of blocks whether IANA wants them or not.
> >Hi Kevin,
> >That matches my understanding of the already-board-approved draft
> >policy 2009-3. However, when evaluating proposal 131, ARIN staff
> >offered a radically different interpretation of 2009-3. Their
> >interpretation is that an ARIN policy which prevents the return of
> >legacy addresses to IANA (prop 131 version 3) conflicts with the
> >mandatory returns to IANA in draft policy 2009-3.
> I do not remember ever seeing that stated, would you please reference the
email you read this in? It is the timing of PP131 that is wrong, not the
intent. In fact in all my conversations with any of ARIN staff I have not
heard that stated. I believe your use of the word "mandatory" is not
> >Hence proposal 135 which, in my opinion, does not alter 2009-3 in any
> >way. It merely clarifies the intended interpretation of 2009-3's
A proposal that changes nothing is a non op.
> >Bill Herrin
> William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML