[arin-ppml] ARIN Multiple Discrete Networks Policy

[Richard A Steenbergen]

On Sat, Oct 01, 2011 at 10:45:32PM +0000, John Curran wrote:
> > If they meet one of the existing examples for compelling reasons to use 
> > multiple discrete networks? I kinda figured that part was a given. :)
> 
> Richard - Hopefully, we don't need examples of compelling reasons if
> a clear technical definition of "discrete networks" is added (as it 
> would remove the requirement for judgement of "compelling reason")

Er, yes you do... Discrete networks is a state, not a reason. The 
current policy says you need to demonstrate a) that you are using them 
(the same A you were talking about in your other question) and b) that 
you have a compelling reason to run them (the same B). Nothing in the 
definition of discrete network affects this in any way!

> [B] still requires judgement, i.e. explain why the networks must have 
> unique routing policies in order for the networks to operate 
> "correctly".  It is clearer than present policy since it would have a 
> clear definition that equates discrete networks as networks with 
> unique routing policies, but wouldn't eliminate the need for judging 
> whether or not the use of those unique routing polices was truly 
> necessary.
 
Correct, B is a judgement call. Fortunately there is a specific list of 
example compelling reasons already in the policy, so it is the job of 
the applicant to show that they meet one of those examples.

Is THIS now the point of contention? It seem like we're just running 
around in circls through a series of non sequitur objections. I'd really 
like to arrive at a concrete objection that I can actually argue, before 
we get to "arin doesn't really know what the meaning of the word is is" 
or something. :)

> Note: I have no idea whether the community wants either change, but 
> suggest you propose either one, should it better meet your needs.  
> Details on submitting a policy proposal are here: 
> https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp_appendix_b.html

Again, I'm not proposing any changes, I'm suggesting that you are 
massively confused about the meaning of the perfectly good words which 
are already in place. :)

-- 
Richard A Steenbergen <ras at e-gerbil.net>       http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)