[arin-ppml] Oppose Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2

[Brandt, Jason]

It's the time spent on the list.  I waited 11 months on the list before getting my allocation.  Most of the organizations affected are likely to have spent significant time on the list (unfortunately I do not have the exact data on time spent waiting for affected orgs).  Spending time waiting, then get put to the back of the line so to speak and have to do it again, that's the issue.  That was time wasted that could've been spent making other arrangements, hence they were penalized.


Jason 
Brandt 
Senior Systems Engineer
Pearl Companies | 1200 E Glen Ave Peoria Heights, IL 61616
P: 309.679.0184 F: 309.688.5444 E: jason.brandt at pearlcompanies.com
www.pearlcompanies.com | Insurance - Technology - Automotive

PEARL COMPANIES CONFIDENTIALITY: This communication, including attachments, is for exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, disclosure, or distribution or the taking of any action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete this communication and destroy all copies [v1.0.002].
From: Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, November 2, 2020 07:50
To: Brandt, Jason <jason.brandt at pearlcompanies.com>; arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Oppose Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2


CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.


On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 8:42 AM Brandt, Jason via ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>> wrote:
I find it hard to understand how you can believe that this is "special benefits".

Grandfathering is a common technique that addresses inequities changes create. Governments do it and business does it. To some extent, the could be called "special benefits". However, the context of that is different, some feel the benefits create an inequity rather than resolve one.

Organizations went through the approved process to get on the wait list to *possibly* be assigned an address block. The policy on allocations was changed, however the organizations did everything by the book per previous policy. The organization is now told that they have to go through the process again and wait longer. This has nothing to do with potential space allocation. I am all for limiting the allocation amount in the future. However, to penalize an organization that has followed the process to this point is unfair. This also is no guarantee that these organizations will receive an allocation. More likely, they'll continue to wait.
This draft policy is simply to not penalize organizations that went through the proper process of what was approved policy at the time. A similar scenario would be arresting someone who has broken a law, prior to the offense becoming law.


The question for me is what, clearly, is the inequity that grandfathering addresses? Going through the process? Waiting on the list and getting nothing? There were no guarantees made when a company got on the list as far as I can tell. The process was minimal and I don't think it in itself requires any special compensation. This policy, if I read the meeting minutes correctly and Owen's comments in them, doesn't really help with much at all.



I continue to support this policy, not because I agree that larger requests should be granted, but because the organizations had followed the approved process and policies.

I'm not entirely certain where I sit on this. So far I haven't seen strong arguments one way or the other.

Fair enough. Thank you.

Warm regards,

-M<


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20201102/721e504a/attachment.htm>