I generally agree with Kevin. Buy 'should be allocated' I have no problem with.
Rudi Daniel On May 22, 2014 10:08 AM, "Kevin Kargel" <[email protected]> wrote: > IMHO “Should” and “May” have no place in policy. They are both no-ops as > they place no restrictions and carry no authority. They would be perfectly > at home in a best practices document, but serve no function in policy. > > Kevin > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On > Behalf Of *Rudolph Daniel > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 21, 2014 4:34 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] 2014-12 > > > > > >>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.
