[arin-ppml] [EXT] Re: Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation
owen at delong.com
Sat Apr 27 03:38:43 EDT 2019
My text below is my own thoughts and not any official position from ARIN or the AC...
> On Apr 27, 2019, at 00:23 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet at consulintel.es> wrote:
> Hi Owen,
> El 27/4/19 9:00, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com <mailto:owen at delong.com>> escribió:
> Speaking only as a member of the community and based only on my understanding of the PDP from reading it on the ARIN web site. If ARIN staff, the board, or the chair of the AC have a differing opinion, my words below should be considered in err.
> Close… You are absolutely correct that the petition is not about the proposal’s merits (or lack thereof).
> In this case, the petition is actually to request that the ARIN Board review the AC decision. If the ARIN board reverses the AC decision that the proposal is out of scope, I believe it goes onto the AC Docket as a draft policy, though I’m not 100% sure whether it then remains under the editorial control of the authors (as would be the case for a petition against abandonment or delay) or whether it goes under the editorial control of the AC as is the case with a draft policy that didn’t become a draft through the petition process.
> Authors already have a new version ready (being published in RIPE in a matter of hours/days), so it will be the logic thing, that if the petition is accepted, we can update it. I think this is in the scope of the PDP.
I believe you can update it now and ask that the new version be reconsidered if you believe that your update brings it within scope. There’s a small chance that I’m wrong about that, but I don’t think so. As I’ve told you several times now, the AC decision does not preclude discussion of the matter. It merely prevents the proposal from advancing to draft policy status until something changes to bring it into scope or until a petition of that decision succeeds.
> To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time this particular type of petition has been exercised.
> It is possible that the board will uphold the AC decision, in which case, I believe that’s the end of the process and the proposal remains off the docket.
> This is documented in section 3.2.1 of the PDP available at https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/#2-valid-petitions <https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/#2-valid-petitions>
> Having read that several times (and it is not a very clear process, and have clear failures, such as 5 natural days for the petition, including weekend, bank holidays, etc. ... in this case also the 1st of those days was national holiday for one of the authors, and the last day is holiday in many countries), and to be honest, as already said, I don't link this process vs other RIRs PDPs (which of course aren't perfect, but at least they are not being a "representative" system for the community).
You are welcome to address your issues with our PDP through the ACSP and/or by contacting the board. The PDP itself is not within the purview of the PDP or the Advisory Council, so I cannot help you here.
I don’t think that the 5 natural day limit for filing a petition is at all unreasonable. All that is required is a simple email indicating that you wish to initiate a petition. Really, even if a couple of the 5 days are taken up as holidays, is it unreasonable to expect you to send a short email within 3 days? I think not. It’s also worth noting that the 5 day clock does not start ticking until the publication of the draft minutes. Often the meeting report is published prior to the draft minutes by several days, so authors usually have more than 5 days notice to actually submit the petition.
Could you point to what you think is unclear? IMHO, there are some unclear outcomes (e.g. who gets editorial control after the board reverses an AC decision of out-of-scope? Does the board’s reversal of the AC decision result in direct to draft policy status, or, does the AC then still have to act to move it to draft?), but the petition process itself seems quite clear to me.
1. Send a notice to PPML within 5 days of the publication of the draft minutes announcing the action being petitioned.
2. Gather supporting comments from the required number of other parties over the next 5 days.
3. Staff publishes a decision about whether the petition succeeded or not.
Clearly the process was not so difficult to understand as to prevent you from successfully engaging it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML