>>their experimental >>documentation (should) clearly >>describe ....
Would you consider changing 'should' to 'shall' to suggest mandatory requirement? And > justify why a larger allocation >(is required) 'is required' to 'should be allocated' Rudi Daniel On May 21, 2014 5:20 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ARIN-PPML digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack Policy (Owen DeLong) 2. Re: Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack Policy (Leif Sawyer) 3. Re: Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack Policy (David Farmer) 4. Re: Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-13: Reduce All Minimum Allocation/Assignment Units to /24 (Derek Calanchini) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 11:33:42 -0700 From: Owen DeLong <[email protected]> To: David Farmer <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack Policy Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > In looking at the sentence in question; I think the "have" in the sentence is extraneous, and can deleted. Then changing "this" to "a larger allocation" and the tense changes you suggest, results in; > > If an organization requires more resource than stipulated by the > minimum allocation sizes in force at the time of their request, > their experimental documentation should clearly describe and > justify why a larger allocation is required. > s/resource/resources/ s/minimum allocation sizes/applicable minimum allocation size/ s/experimental documentation/request/ result: If an organization requires more resources than stipulated by the applicable minimum allocation in force at the time of their request, their request should clearly describe and justify why a larger allocation is required. I think this not only parses better, but is more accurate. The first change resolves a grammar error. The second change avoids ambiguity between whether all requests are subject to all minimums in this case vs. the intended meaning that the minimum applicable elsewhere in policy. The third change is because their documentation should be documentation of an experiment, not experimental documentation and what we really care about is the information provided in their ARIN request anyway. I think since this is a minor change which does not alter the meaning of the policy and does improve readability and clarity, that we should probably go ahead and incorporate it as you proposed prior to last call. Owen ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 10:52:48 -0800 From: Leif Sawyer <[email protected]> To: Owen DeLong <[email protected]>, David Farmer <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack Policy Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 s/should/must -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Owen DeLong Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:34 AM To: David Farmer Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack Policy > > In looking at the sentence in question; I think the "have" in the > sentence is extraneous, and can deleted. Then changing "this" to "a > larger allocation" and the tense changes you suggest, results in; > > If an organization requires more resource than stipulated by the > minimum allocation sizes in force at the time of their request, > their experimental documentation should clearly describe and > justify why a larger allocation is required. > s/resource/resources/ s/minimum allocation sizes/applicable minimum allocation size/ s/experimental documentation/request/ result: If an organization requires more resources than stipulated by the applicable minimum allocation in force at the time of their request, their request should clearly describe and justify why a larger allocation is required. I think this not only parses better, but is more accurate. The first change resolves a grammar error. The second change avoids ambiguity between whether all requests are subject to all minimums in this case vs. the intended meaning that the minimum applicable elsewhere in policy. The third change is because their documentation should be documentation of an experiment, not experimental documentation and what we really care about is the information provided in their ARIN request anyway. I think since this is a minor change which does not alter the meaning of the policy and does improve readability and clarity, that we should probably go ahead and incorporate it as you proposed prior to last call. Owen _______________________________________________ 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. ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 15:03:39 -0500 From: David Farmer <[email protected]> To: Leif Sawyer <[email protected]>, Owen DeLong <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack Policy Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed I think "should" is sufficiently strong, and gives ARIN Staff a little wiggle room to do what makes sense. There really have never been that many experimental allocations. We had a big whoopsie with all 5 RIR's authorizing /12 anchor routes. ARIN probably won't do that again anyway, but it's still worth a small fix in policy, just to be clear about it. The sentence is question is a little rough, so while we are at it a little editorial clean up is probably in order, but please let's not over do it. I really would like to hear from a few more people about if this editorial change is a good idea or not, even a few +/-1s would be helpful. Thanks. On 5/21/14, 13:52 , Leif Sawyer wrote: > s/should/must > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Owen DeLong > Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:34 AM > To: David Farmer > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: Anti-hijack Policy > >> >> In looking at the sentence in question; I think the "have" in the >> sentence is extraneous, and can deleted. Then changing "this" to "a >> larger allocation" and the tense changes you suggest, results in; >> >> If an organization requires more resource than stipulated by the >> minimum allocation sizes in force at the time of their request, >> their experimental documentation should clearly describe and >> justify why a larger allocation is required. >> > > s/resource/resources/ > s/minimum allocation sizes/applicable minimum allocation size/ s/experimental documentation/request/ > > result: > > If an organization requires more resources than stipulated by the applicable minimum allocation in force at the time of their request, their request should clearly describe and justify why a larger allocation is required. > > I think this not only parses better, but is more accurate. > > The first change resolves a grammar error. > The second change avoids ambiguity between whether all requests are subject to all minimums in this case vs. the intended meaning that the minimum applicable elsewhere in policy. > The third change is because their documentation should be documentation of an experiment, not experimental documentation and what we really care about is the information provided in their ARIN request anyway. > > I think since this is a minor change which does not alter the meaning of the policy and does improve readability and clarity, that we should probably go ahead and incorporate it as you proposed prior to last call. > > Owen > > _______________________________________________ > 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. > -- ================================================ 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 ================================================ ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 14:18:56 -0700 From: Derek Calanchini <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-13: Reduce All Minimum Allocation/Assignment Units to /24 Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: < http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140521/3f8fb7ce/attachment.html > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: cnslogo1.bmp Type: image/bmp Size: 72774 bytes Desc: not available URL: < http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140521/3f8fb7ce/attachment.bmp > ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML mailing list [email protected] http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 107, Issue 26 ******************************************
_______________________________________________ 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.
