[arin-ppml] IP Address Policy

Gary Buhrmaster gary.buhrmaster at gmail.com
Thu Aug 9 16:43:46 EDT 2012

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Steven Ryerse
<SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com> wrote:
> With all due respect bad policies need to be changed.


>  Policy isn't policy as you say when it is bad policy.  Consensus isn't good when it is wrong.

And policy is not bad just because it means you do not get what
you want, when you want, just because you want it, no matter
how many times you assert it.

In any community/society there are rules and covenants that one
accepts to become a participant.  Being a participant means that
you can propose and suggest changes, but that by no means
assures you that there will be agreement that your proposals
will win the day.

As a participant in the community, I would suggest that you
consider taking advantage of the offers that others have made
to help you propose policy changes since you clearly believe
that existing policy is not in the best interest of the community.
That is a constructive way to move forward.  So would be taking
advantage of some of the alternative ways people have proposed
to you to frame the issue (to ARIN).  What is not especially
constructive is simply asserting the policies are bad for one
request, so ARIN should tear them all up.

You also keep throwing out the term "Fiduciary Responsibilities".
I will quote a movie:  "You keep using that word.  I do not think
it means what you think it means".


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list