[arin-ppml] ARIN-2011-1: ARIN Inter-RIR Transfers - Last Call

Bill Darte BillD at cait.wustl.edu
Wed Oct 19 21:35:54 EDT 2011


Bill,

I appreciate your concern for the policy process and asking for clarification is a fine and useful mechanism for all to gain a more complete understanding.  Questioning John Curran about whether he is representing ARIN or himself when he is clearing speaking about the PDP and signing his emails in an official manner as the President of ARIN seems to be less useful.

Furthermore, I do not believe that you interpret the changes to the Draft Policy correctly by stating that it is a new policy.  But, for clarification, please help us all understand precisely where you interpret the changes in the modified text to change the character, intent or the will of the community for an Inter-regional transfer policy.

Thanks,

bd


-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net on behalf of William Herrin
Sent: Wed 10/19/2011 8:11 PM
To: John Curran
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-2011-1: ARIN Inter-RIR Transfers - Last Call
 
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:47 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> On Oct 19, 2011, at 8:28 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>> I would like to see the AC request a ruling as to whether changes of
>> this magnitude within section 4 of the PDP process are defensible as
>> mere changes to the draft versus the new text being considered a fresh
>> draft policy subject to entry into the process at section 2.
>
> The changes that occur to a draft policy text after presentation
> at the public policy meeting can be quite extensive and include
> any action including rewriting, merging, or abandoning. I believe
> that you are seeing the result of a "rewrite" of the draft policy,
> and this is noted as specifically allowed by the PDP for policies
> after PPM, with the protection being that any change results in
> another last call to the community.

Is this John Curran's opinion or is this the President of ARIN's
ruling on the process question as it relates to draft 2011-1?


> Note also that you do have the option to petition for the original
> policy text to be sent to last call, if you do not like the action
> taken by the ARIN AC on the draft policy.

The original text has all of the faults that have been attributed to
it in this thread. It was not expressed in clear, actionable policy
language and was indubitably in need of editing. The last thing I want
to do is petition for that text to be sent to last call.

In my opinion, the draft on the table IS NOT an edited version of that
text. This is probably a good thing. Purely from a "is this well
written actionable policy text," Scott's document is structurally
superior. But when you write a whole new proposal, it's a new
proposal. Throwing away a document and writing a new one is not a
change to the document, it's a new document.

And it should be treated as a new document.

Regards,
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
_______________________________________________
PPML
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:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20111019/0097ceaf/attachment.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list