[arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2015-1: Modification to Criteria for IPv6 Initial End-User Assignments

William Herrin bill at herrin.us
Fri Jun 26 18:22:29 EDT 2015

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:55 AM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:
> As shepherd, I would be inclined to revise the policy statement so that it
> inserts e) and renumbers the current e) to f), rather than replacing the
> entire section as currently worded.  Basically that would just mean
> promoting "b. General Comments:" to become the policy text.
> Bill, would that be sufficient for you, given the desire (for clarity) to
> have all the explicit cases listed first and the catchall at the end?

Hi Scott,

I think there's sound reasoning for the catchall to come last. Maybe
ask staff for advice? Reordering is generally a bad thing for this
sort of document, but every rule has its exceptions. If staff concurs
that reordering here is the optimal choice, I'd be satisfied.

Maybe there's a third way we're not seeing, like retiring e, adding
the new element as f, and then re-inserting the catchall some other
way, point g or as a sentence that follows the ordered list.


William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list