The problem this proposal intended to fix was with the staff, not the researchers.
This proposal is a no op. Who was held accountable? Who will be held accountable if it happens again? I suggest the intent of the policy is good enough. On Wednesday, May 21, 2014, Leif Sawyer <[email protected]> wrote: > I just can't think of a time when > "experimental documentation [should] clearly describe and justify" > "should" ever be "doesn't" > > > hence my suggestion to use "must". > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Farmer [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 12:04 PM > To: Leif Sawyer; Owen DeLong > Cc: David Farmer; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2014-12: > Anti-hijack Policy > > 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 > ================================================ > > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving
_______________________________________________ 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.
