[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-153 Correct erroneous syntax in NRPM 8.3

[Owen DeLong]

On May 29, 2011, at 4:01 AM, John Curran wrote:

> On May 29, 2011, at 1:20 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> 
>>> As the general principles in 4.1.8 may easily be read to allow a party to 
>>> request a transfer of a smaller block due to availability, and your intent
>>> is clearly to disallow such, it might be best to clarify that point when 
>>> changing the syntax to require transfers in the exact amount the documented 
>>> need of the recipient.
>>> 
>> I'd appreciate it if staff can provide words that would do that. It is my
>> reading of the language in 153 that it says exactly that. Since it sounds
>> like staff has a different reading, I think I have made the intent clear
>> and will instead request that staff provide language that will have
>> the desired effect.
> 
> Owen - 
> 
> The language in ARIN-prop-153 is clear enough, but it is not when read with 
> the general concepts in 4.1.8 and their potential application to specified 
> transfers under your proposal, in particular:
> 
>  - Does the requesting organization have the option to specify the 
>    transfer of a smaller block than their need, as long as it is 
>    equal to or larger than the applicable minimum size specified 
>    elsewhere in ARIN policy?
> 
>  From your response, I believe your intent is "No".  
> 
> This point will be readily argued by those requesting transfers (by pointing
> to the text in 4.1.8) unless otherwise directly addressed in your proposal.
> It could be as simple as adding a statement to 153 that "An organization may 
> not receive a smaller block than their documented need."  
> 
I dont' necessarily want to preclude them from receiving a smaller block, but,
I want to preclude them from receiving MULTIPLE smaller blocks over a short
time.

> Note that we would still apply the remainder of the 4.1.8 regarding disallowing 
> repeated requests as a means of circumvention, i.e. an organization may only 
> receive one transfer every 3 months, but ARIN, at its sole discretion, may waive 
> this requirement if the requester can document a change in circumstances since 
> their last request that could not have been reasonably foreseen at the time of 
> the original request, and which now justifies additional space. 
> 

OK, then, it probably comes about as close as possible to the intent as is.

Owen

> FYI,
> /John
> 
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> ARIN
> 
>