[arin-ppml] Against 2013-4

William Herrin bill at herrin.us
Tue Jun 4 09:07:57 EDT 2013

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com> wrote:
> If people want to throw out the current principles of stewardship,
> and create a new set of principles that are better than the ones
> we already have (maybe we got it wrong the first time), I support
> that, and wish you the best of luck, but believe this to be a very
> contentious and difficult to make progress.
> I am trying to simply document our current stewardship principles,
> and have mostly lifted text from RFC 2050, the NRPM and the
> PDP, such that these guiding ideas do not get lost if RFC 2050
> is deprecated.

Hi Jason,

However it was intended, it's being perceived as an attempt to squelch
the folks who've expressed a growing dissatisfaction with RFC 2050 and
the more dated concepts it proposes. Nor is that perception mistaken.
To achieve your stated goal you'd effectively have to disregard the
input of a relatively broad swath of the participating community. Best
case outcome, you divide the community over this.

Trying to develop what the principles *should be* is likely to be as
contentious as you suspect. But whether or not we achieve a proposal
with broad consent, we'd at least have moved the thinking process in a
forward direction.

> Maybe a better way to phrase this question is:
> If this draft policy is passed, what changes to the current ARIN
> practices do you oppose?

I vehemently oppose this draft policy as written. It's proposes
atavistic reversion, propping up too many concepts that either have
died or ought to.

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

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list