[arin-ppml] 2014-12
Rudolph Daniel
rudi.daniel at gmail.com
Wed May 21 17:34:13 EDT 2014
>>their experimental >>documentation (should) clearly >>describe ....
Would you consider changing 'should' to 'shall' to suggest mandatory
requirement?
And
> justify why a larger allocation >(is required)
'is required' to
'should be allocated'
Rudi Daniel
On May 21, 2014 5:20 PM, <arin-ppml-request at arin.net> wrote:
Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to
arin-ppml at arin.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
arin-ppml-request at arin.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
arin-ppml-owner at arin.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ARIN-PPML digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack Policy
(Owen DeLong)
2. Re: Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack
Policy
(Leif Sawyer)
3. Re: Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack Policy
(David Farmer)
4. Re: Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-13: Reduce All Minimum
Allocation/Assignment Units to /24 (Derek Calanchini)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 11:33:42 -0700
From: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
To: David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu>
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12:
Anti-hijack Policy
Message-ID: <E966D949-CBE7-4BB2-AE10-0D42B27752AB at delong.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> In looking at the sentence in question; I think the "have" in the
sentence is extraneous, and can deleted. Then changing "this" to "a larger
allocation" and the tense changes you suggest, results in;
>
> If an organization requires more resource than stipulated by the
> minimum allocation sizes in force at the time of their request,
> their experimental documentation should clearly describe and
> justify why a larger allocation is required.
>
s/resource/resources/
s/minimum allocation sizes/applicable minimum allocation size/
s/experimental documentation/request/
result:
If an organization requires more resources than stipulated by the
applicable minimum allocation in force at the time of their request, their
request should clearly describe and justify why a larger allocation is
required.
I think this not only parses better, but is more accurate.
The first change resolves a grammar error.
The second change avoids ambiguity between whether all requests are subject
to all minimums in this case vs. the intended meaning that the minimum
applicable elsewhere in policy.
The third change is because their documentation should be documentation of
an experiment, not experimental documentation and what we really care about
is the information provided in their ARIN request anyway.
I think since this is a minor change which does not alter the meaning of
the policy and does improve readability and clarity, that we should
probably go ahead and incorporate it as you proposed prior to last call.
Owen
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 10:52:48 -0800
From: Leif Sawyer <lsawyer at gci.com>
To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>, David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu>
Cc: "arin-ppml at arin.net" <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12:
Anti-hijack Policy
Message-ID:
<18B2C6E38A3A324986B392B2D18ABC5102C7F8AA3B at fnb1mbx01.gci.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252
s/should/must
-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
Behalf Of Owen DeLong
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:34 AM
To: David Farmer
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack
Policy
>
> In looking at the sentence in question; I think the "have" in the
> sentence is extraneous, and can deleted. Then changing "this" to "a
> larger allocation" and the tense changes you suggest, results in;
>
> If an organization requires more resource than stipulated by the
> minimum allocation sizes in force at the time of their request,
> their experimental documentation should clearly describe and
> justify why a larger allocation is required.
>
s/resource/resources/
s/minimum allocation sizes/applicable minimum allocation size/
s/experimental documentation/request/
result:
If an organization requires more resources than stipulated by the
applicable minimum allocation in force at the time of their request, their
request should clearly describe and justify why a larger allocation is
required.
I think this not only parses better, but is more accurate.
The first change resolves a grammar error.
The second change avoids ambiguity between whether all requests are subject
to all minimums in this case vs. the intended meaning that the minimum
applicable elsewhere in policy.
The third change is because their documentation should be documentation of
an experiment, not experimental documentation and what we really care about
is the information provided in their ARIN request anyway.
I think since this is a minor change which does not alter the meaning of
the policy and does improve readability and clarity, that we should
probably go ahead and incorporate it as you proposed prior to last call.
Owen
_______________________________________________
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.
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 15:03:39 -0500
From: David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu>
To: Leif Sawyer <lsawyer at gci.com>, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
Cc: "arin-ppml at arin.net" <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12:
Anti-hijack Policy
Message-ID: <537D069B.5030601 at umn.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
I think "should" is sufficiently strong, and gives ARIN Staff a little
wiggle room to do what makes sense. There really have never been that
many experimental allocations.
We had a big whoopsie with all 5 RIR's authorizing /12 anchor routes.
ARIN probably won't do that again anyway, but it's still worth a small
fix in policy, just to be clear about it. The sentence is question is a
little rough, so while we are at it a little editorial clean up is
probably in order, but please let's not over do it.
I really would like to hear from a few more people about if this
editorial change is a good idea or not, even a few +/-1s would be helpful.
Thanks.
On 5/21/14, 13:52 , Leif Sawyer wrote:
> s/should/must
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
Behalf Of Owen DeLong
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:34 AM
> To: David Farmer
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12:
Anti-hijack Policy
>
>>
>> In looking at the sentence in question; I think the "have" in the
>> sentence is extraneous, and can deleted. Then changing "this" to "a
>> larger allocation" and the tense changes you suggest, results in;
>>
>> If an organization requires more resource than stipulated by the
>> minimum allocation sizes in force at the time of their request,
>> their experimental documentation should clearly describe and
>> justify why a larger allocation is required.
>>
>
> s/resource/resources/
> s/minimum allocation sizes/applicable minimum allocation size/
s/experimental documentation/request/
>
> result:
>
> If an organization requires more resources than stipulated by the
applicable minimum allocation in force at the time of their request, their
request should clearly describe and justify why a larger allocation is
required.
>
> I think this not only parses better, but is more accurate.
>
> The first change resolves a grammar error.
> The second change avoids ambiguity between whether all requests are
subject to all minimums in this case vs. the intended meaning that the
minimum applicable elsewhere in policy.
> The third change is because their documentation should be documentation
of an experiment, not experimental documentation and what we really care
about is the information provided in their ARIN request anyway.
>
> I think since this is a minor change which does not alter the meaning of
the policy and does improve readability and clarity, that we should
probably go ahead and incorporate it as you proposed prior to last call.
>
> Owen
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
--
================================================
David Farmer Email: farmer at umn.edu
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952
================================================
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 14:18:56 -0700
From: Derek Calanchini <derekc at cnets.net>
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-13: Reduce
All Minimum Allocation/Assignment Units to /24
Message-ID: <537D1840.7020005 at cnets.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140521/3f8fb7ce/attachment.html
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cnslogo1.bmp
Type: image/bmp
Size: 72774 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <
http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140521/3f8fb7ce/attachment.bmp
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML mailing list
ARIN-PPML at arin.net
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 107, Issue 26
******************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140521/6ee890d9/attachment.htm>
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list