[arin-ppml] Team Review - policy matter? (was: Re: reverse COE statement)

[John Curran]

On Sep 24, 2014, at 4:33 PM, David Huberman <David.Huberman at microsoft.com> wrote:

> Owen,
> 
> I understand what you're saying, and I think I agree.  I don't understand why John is saying 'submit a template? because I agree with you that it isn't at all a policy matter.

David - 

I do not believe that it is a policy matter - Owen suggested that 
it was implied by NRPM 8.3 policy language (which provides that 
the recipient and resources must meet ARIN's current policies.).  
I pointed out that the policy would have to be must clearer to hold 
the meaning he intends and note the option of a policy proposal.

ARIN's IPv4 Countdown Plan is quite similar to the serialization 
and review of requests that APNIC and RIPE performed as part of
their IPv4 pool runout plans, and originated in order to provide
for fair treatment of requests from the free pool as we approach
runout.  Team review of requests (where the entire analyst staff
gathers to process the request queue) is not efficient, but does
provide benefits for serialization in processing of requests. It
is unclear how that would be at all beneficial for IPv4 transfers
and it definitely would impact IPv4 transfer processing times.

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN