I'm going to break this up into separate sub threads.
On 9/17/13 10:20 , Matthew Petach wrote:
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 3:59 PM, David Farmer <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 9/14/13 22:58 , Matthew Petach wrote:
...
change
" a plurality of resources requested from ARIN must be justified by
technical
infrastructure and customers located within the ARIN service region,
and any located
outside the region must be interconnected to the ARIN service region."
to
" a significant fraction of the resources requested from ARIN
must be justified by technical infrastructure or customers located
within the ARIN service region, and any located outside the region must
be
interconnected to the ARIN service region."
If we don't like plurality for whatever reason, I'd suggest;
"a minimum of X% of the resources requested from ARIN must be
justified by technical infrastructure or customers located within
the ARIN service region, and any located outside the region must be
interconnected to the ARIN service region."
Where X% is something like 20%, 25%, or 30%.
So, how about something like this, then?
"a minimum of 20% of the *new* resources requested from ARIN must be
justified by technical infrastructure or customers physically located within
the borders of ARIN member countries, and any technical infrastructure
or customers located outside the ARIN region must be physically
interconnected to the ARIN service region"
I will modify the current language adding "new" making it "a plurality
of new resources requested" before the text freeze, I think that
clarifies the current intent. Are there any objections to the "new
resources requested" language?
However, I'd like to hear more comments in support of a flat 20%
standard before I'm willing to make that change, as I think that
significantly changes the intent, at least in the view of some. As an
Individual I'd support a flat 20% standard. But as the primary shepherd
for the proposal, I'm a little worried we would loose as much or more
support than we would gain with that change. So, I need a better read
on what the community as a whole thinks of a flat 20% standard before
making that change. No matter what, I will include that in the
questions I take to the floor of the PPM.
As for some of the other additions I'm not sure "physically located
within the borders of ARIN member countries" add much verses "located
within the ARIN service region", or "physically interconnected" vs.
"interconnected". In your opinion what do these changes add?
Thanks
--
================================================
David Farmer Email: [email protected]
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952
================================================
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
