[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2021-6: Remove Circuit Requirement

[Jace A Taylor]

Opposed

--
Jace A. Taylor
General Manager / C.O.O.
Reynolds Telephone Co.



On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 7:14 PM Chris Woodfield <chris at semihuman.com> wrote:

> If you didn’t notice, my initial contribution to this subthread concluded
> with the sentence below:
>
> "If you are an operator, ISP, or content provider who would benefit from
> this, I would recommend that you speak up in order to keep this proposal
> alive. “
>
> I think that is exactly the definition of encouraging discussion. You’re
> free to disagree with my assessment, but you and I are not the scorekeepers
> here.
>
> -C
>
> > On Sep 21, 2021, at 5:03 PM, Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > It's been hours, Chris, and shouldn't you be encouraging discussion
> rather than the opposite?
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---- On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 20:01:29 -0400 Chris Woodfield <
> chris at semihuman.com> wrote ----
> >
> > Given there was a proposal published last week that was withdrawn within
> hours by its author*, I don’t think it’s unreasonable at all to start
> keeping score WRT the level of community support on this one. And while the
> definition of “strong support” is intentionally subjective, my four years
> serving on the ARIN AC have informed my opinion that the current AC looks
> for, at minimum, a lack of opposition from other segments of the community
> on a proposal that appears to have the support of only one. A proposal
> supported by the representatives of one segment, and by appearances so far,
> strongly opposed by virtually everyone else, tend to have a rather short
> lifetime on the AC docket.
> >
> > -C
> >
> > * Technically the author doesn’t withdraw a proposal, as it’s in the
> AC’s hands once published. But in general, I would expect the AC to honor a
> proposal author’s request to abandon it.
> >
> > On Sep 21, 2021, at 3:48 PM, Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > Not sure how experienced you are with this, but this proposal has only
> been out for a few hours and any talk about "keeping it alive" is a tad
> early.
> >
> > Also, you might brush up on the concept of ad hominem. It means against
> the person(s). It could be only brokers who support a policy and if there
> are no valid objections, that support should carry the day.
> >
> > Now, do you have any objections that you would care to share, other than
> your original one (which I think Owen dispensed with)?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---- On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 18:37:43 -0400 Chris Woodfield <
> chris at semihuman.com> wrote ----
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Sep 21, 2021, at 2:47 PM, Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Noah,
> > >
> > > Thanks for your thoughts, my replies are inline.
> > >
> > > “Transfers are generally a prerogative of brokers who don't
> necessarily provide any form of network services. It does make sense for a
> broker to defend this model.”
> > >
> > > Noah that is a meaningless ad hominem, every transfer has a recipient.
> > >
> >
> > You are not incorrect here - it takes two to tango, so to speak. And
> brokers are an important segment of the ARIN community, to the extent that
> representatives of IP brokers have been elected to the ARIN AC.
> >
> > That said, one of the requirements for a Draft Policy to move forward to
> an RDP is, per section 4.3:, "Changes to policy must be shown to have a
> strong level of support in the community in order to be adopted.” Reading
> the replies to this thread so far, the only community members that have
> voiced support for this proposal have been representatives of IP brokers.
> Correct me if I’ve missed any, but I see zero statements of support so far
> from members of any other segment of the ARIN community.
> >
> > I would be very surprised if the AC would advance to RDP a policy
> proposal that has support of only one segment of the community, and as far
> as I can tell, universal opposition from those who are not in that segment.
> If you are an operator, ISP, or content provider who would benefit from
> this, I would recommend that you speak up in order to keep this proposal
> alive.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > -Chris
> >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > ARIN-PPML
> > > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> > > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> > > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> > > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> > > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20210921/6967179c/attachment.htm>