[arin-ppml] re-org question
farmer at umn.edu
Fri Nov 18 12:05:33 EST 2016
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 8:10 AM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> Thanks John, I appreciate the clarification.
> Please pardon my rhetoric, but does the NRPM have any more instances
> of non-binding "community expectations" that we can all safely ignore?
> It seems to me like this sort of thing is undesirable in an
> otherwise-binding policy document.
> Bill Herrin
While I may not be happy with the way this particular "community
expectation" is instantiated in policy, I feel the policy in question is
too onerous. That said, I think it is extremely important for "community
expectations" to be communicated through policy.
Further, I would suggest that an attitude that non-binding "community
expectations" can be safely ignored is dangerous, because it only invites
the community to create policies that are binding and likely to be
inflexible and even more onerous. If fact I feel the reason we have the
policy in question is because too many people are ignoring "community
expectations" to begin with.
Voluntary compliance with "community expectations" is a much preferred
model for most policy in my opinion and is key to the industry
David Farmer Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML