owen at delong.com
Fri Jan 7 14:56:46 EST 2011
I'm listed there and I'm opposed to 124 and 125.
I'm not sure you can draw the connections and conclusions you are drawing from that.
On Jan 7, 2011, at 8:02 AM, Bret Palsson wrote:
> You may not be listed here, but some that are pushing for this policy are. Seems like marketing to me:
> Placing your bio and contact information as an ipv6expert and creating/pushing policy that not many people want seems like the policy is for the better of the policy maker rather than the whole community.
> I agree ipv6 needs to be adopted. I don't think it's ARINs place to force it. It will come naturally as ipv4 runs out. We don't need a policy policing that.
> I think if someone has a justified reason to request ipv4 and it's available, ARIN can decide to grant that allocation.
> We don't need more loop holes to jump through. IPv6 will be adopted with or without this policy. Let's move on with our lives and accept the AC's decision.
> On Jan 7, 2011, at 8:51 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Bret Palsson <bret at getjive.com> wrote:
>>> As one who is petitioning PP 124, that feed back just shows you are doing this for the money. We don't create policy to make ourselves rich or for job security, or at least we shouldn't. Obviously this is your primary motive.
>>> I'm opposed to PP 124.
>> Pretty far flung accusation. Can you explain how I'm going to profit
>> from 125? For that matter, can you explain how anyone is going to
>> profit from 125?
>> You can get in the hug line.
> 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.
More information about the ARIN-PPML