On 6/2/14, 11:04 , David Farmer wrote:
On 6/2/14, 09:26 , Kevin Kargel wrote:
I will respectfully disagree. What is the point of “should”? Even in
the example you gave it would better as “must unless” or “shall unless”
instead of “should unless” . With “should” there is no reason for the
unless because there is no requirement to do otherwise in the first
place.
Should leaves a loophole that can be easily exploited, i.e. “you never
said we had to do that, you just said we should, so I can technically do
whatever I want”..
Sorry, I don't have time to debate this issue in general at this moment.
The PPC at NANOG 61 is just over 24 hours away.
It would be perfectly functional to say:
“The allocation size shall be consistent with the existing ARIN minimum
allocation sizes, unless small allocations are intended to be explicitly
part of the experiment.”
Are you suggesting we should also change that sentence as well? If you
are I need to know ASAP, like I said the PPC is just over 24 hours away
and I have to finalize the presentation ASAP. I would also like to hear
support from a couple others on PPML before opening that sentence also
to changes, as well.
I don't feel I got sufficient support to modify this sentences on PPML
prior to the PPC. Also, I discussed this sentence with a couple other AC
members and with ARIN Staff. Given the "should" is immediately followed
by a conditional "unless" the intent seems sufficiently clear, the
intent is to create a special-case exception, and "should" seems
appropriate. Furthermore, "must" or "shall" followed by "unless" seemed
an awkward way to create such an exception.
Therefore, I did not include any changes to this sentence in the
Editorial Changes presented at the PPC.
Using “should” in the statement makes it a no-op. With “should” you can
choose not to follow what is only a suggestion. If you use “shall” or
“must” you have enforceable policy. If the policy is not enforceable it
is nothing more than a best practice statement at best.
I also respectfully disagree. However, I will discuss the issue with
ARIN staff here at NANOG to understand how they interpret this issue.
Staff generally agrees that in most cases for policy "must" is preferred
and it is best to avoid "should" in most cases. However, in the
sentence above the intent seem clear enough and "should" seems
appropriate in that particular case.
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.
