[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles - revised
cja at daydream.com
Thu Sep 19 22:36:43 EDT 2013
Right and my point was that this couldn't just be submitted as a global
policy as-is and that's what I thought was being suggested on the ppml
It's good to see how it goes in Phoenix and take it from there.
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Sweeting, John
<john.sweeting at twcable.com>wrote:
> Right, I just wanted to point out for clarity that for 2013-4 the
> preferred path is to continue through the ARIN PDP process. And thanks for
> all the good information (Cathy too).
> From: Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com>
> Date: Thursday, September 19, 2013 11:00 AM
> To: John Sweeting <john.sweeting at twcable.com>
> Cc: CJ Aronson <cja at daydream.com>, "arin-ppml at arin.net" <
> arin-ppml at arin.net>
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles -
> At this point we can only pursue this policy as an ARIN policy as written
> as we are post Sept 10, and the draft policy text is frozen.
> I suspect the changes to make this global would be significant, unlikely
> to happen in last call, and even if rewritten on the floor at the public
> policy meeting (which is nearly prohibited) would likely require another
> cycle to provide the community enough time to review.
> What I was attempting to do was jump start the conversation on a global
> approach such that if a global policy was desired, that would could
> possibly short cycle the process by sorting out those details earlier on in
> the discussion.
> At this point a group of international authors are awaiting the out come
> of our ARIN discussion prior to moving forward. I have also noted that
> this group is aware of the significant streamlining and rewriting, and have
> also noted that the LACNIC Policy Manual is more in-line with the original
> RFC-2050 language that has been stricken. Discussion of the new language
> has been tabled until after the results of the discussion at ARIN meeting.
> The options I presented in my previous email were options of alternative
> ways to proceed, if movement towards a global direction was desired earlier
> in the discussion, and are no longer valid.
> I am not suggesting we try to make this a draft global policy at this
> point (sorry if I created any confusion). I was rather trying to explain
> the comment about considering a global policy proposal, how that could
> happen given the current text does not impact IANA, and that I was trying
> to get the community to consider the merits of a global policy and if we
> should move in that direction earlier in the process.
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Sweeting, John <john.sweeting at twcable.com
> > wrote:
>> Thanks Jason.
>> One other option, which I personally like, is that we can continue to
>> process as is and then if/when there is a global opportunity initiated ARIN
>> can participate in that as well. That one of the nice things about policy,
>> it can be changed as required.
>> From: Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com>
>> Date: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 9:24 PM
>> To: CJ Aronson <cja at daydream.com>
>> Cc: "arin-ppml at arin.net" <arin-ppml at arin.net>
>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles -
>> As written is does not qualify as a global policy nor a globally
>> coordinated policy.
>> However one could image it *could* be written, such that IANA would also
>> adopt these principles and these principles should be considered wrt policy
>> of allocation of number resources to RIRs.
>> This would mean two things:
>> 1. we, the global community, should also take these principles in
>> consideration when developing draft global policies.
>> 2. we, the ARIN region community could pass this (now) global policy, and
>> have it not take effect until the four other regions also pass it and the
>> ICANN board ratify it.
>> Optionally we could craft it as a regional policy that automatically gets
>> elevated to a global policy should it pass all five RIRs.
>> The comments were a suggestion about the two points above, and a hint to
>> get people to think if it should be written in such a way as to make it
>> global and binding on IANA.
>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 5:07 PM, CJ Aronson <cja at daydream.com> wrote:
>>> Someone help me here.
>>> I am not sure this would qualify as a "global policy" in terms of the
>>> ASO MOU. The document is here
>>> I have always been told that an global policy is distinctly one that
>>> regulates the interaction between ICANN/IANA and the RIRs. Like policies
>>> for giving out blocks of address space or ASNs by the IANA, etc.
>>> The MOU says this and I am not sure this policy would meet this..
>>> "*5. Global Policy Development Process*
>>> Global policies are defined within the scope of this agreement as
>>> Internet number resource policies that have the agreement of all RIRs
>>> according to their policy development processes and ICANN, and require
>>> specific actions or outcomes on the part of IANA or any other external
>>> ICANN-related body in order to be implemented.
>>> Global policies will be developed in the context of this agreement,
>>> according to the processes defined by attachment A to this MoU.
>>> Under this agreement the ICANN Board will ratify proposed global
>>> policies in accordance with the Global Policy Development Process, using
>>> review procedures as determined by ICANN. ICANN will publish these
>>> procedures no later than ninety (90) days from the date of the signature of
>>> this agreement by all parties.
>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Chris Grundemann <
>>> cgrundemann at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 7:21 PM, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org>wrote:
>>>>> On Sep 17, 2013, at 11:03 AM, Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com>
>>>>> > This current text aims to document existing practice based on
>>>>> historical norms which best instruct the driving principles required to
>>>>> successfully operate an RIR.
>>>>> Apologies if this has been discussed before, but is this intended to
>>>>> be a 'global policy' (in the unanimous among all RIRs and ratified by ICANN
>>>>> board sense)?
>>>> Currently ARIN-2013-4 has only been submitted in the ARIN region. There
>>>> has been some discussion of making it a global proposal, which would
>>>> require someone submitting the same text in all five regions (and all five
>>>> regions agreeing to the same text), but that has not happened at this point.
>>>> 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:
>>>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>>> 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:
>>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>> Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com|571-266-0006
>> This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable
>> proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to
>> copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely
>> for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you
>> are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that
>> any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to
>> the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and
>> may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify
>> the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of
>> this E-mail and any printout.
> Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com|571-266-0006
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML