Michael, your quoting makes it look as if you are responding to us recommending 2014-1 et. al to the board.
That's not what happened... On Jul 22, 2014, at 12:46 , Michael Peddemors <[email protected]> wrote: > On 14-07-22 12:21 PM, ARIN wrote: >> In accordance with the ARIN Policy Development Process (PDP), the ARIN >> Advisory Council (AC) met on 17 July 2014. >> >> The AC recommended the following to the ARIN Board for adoption: >> >> Allocation/Assignment Units to /24 > > Nice to see.. hopefully it doesn't add too much to ARIN workloads, but we > know that many of the little voices out there will thank you. > You left out an intervening line from the original message that is important: "The AC is continuing to work on the following:" That means that these proposals are still under discussion and more conversation is exactly what will continue to happen with them. Hope that clarifies what is going on. > >> Draft Policy ARIN-2014-1: Out of Region Use > > I still think more conversation is needed on this one, there are a lot of > implications, positive and negative. > >> Draft Policy ARIN-2014-6: Remove 7.1 [Maintaining IN-ADDRs] > > +1, ARIN has enough troubles dealing with issues that are of a higher > priority, so let's work on dealing with more important issues. > A shame that there isn't a replacement pointing to a new responsible entity > of course. > >> Draft Policy ARIN-2014-14: Removing Needs Test from Small IPv4 Transfers > > This one, while good in intent, is still confusing.. (eg the language on the > changes concerns /16's which isn't really a small IPv4 Transfer) > > >> Draft Policy ARIN-2014-15: Allow Inter-RIR ASN Transfers > > +1, all logical, can't really see how that can be abused. > >> Draft Policy ARIN-2014-16: Section 4.10 Austerity Policy Update > > Small concern.. > 2. the organization must show immediate use (within 30 days) of 25% of the > allocation; > > Is 30 days too aggressive? Upstream provider issues, unexpected technical > issues? > > >> Draft Policy ARIN-2014-17: Change Utilization Requirements from >> last-allocation to total-aggregate > > This one I will be commenting more on, in response to Owen's comments, > regarding language surrounding supporting other language elsewhere concerning > 'rwhois'. General concept isn't bad, but adding language will ensure more > professional and proscribed usage of the remaining IPv4 space. > > > > -- > "Catch the Magic of Linux..." > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Michael Peddemors, President/CEO LinuxMagic Inc. > Visit us at http://www.linuxmagic.com @linuxmagic > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > A Wizard IT Company - For More Info http://www.wizard.ca > "LinuxMagic" a Registered TradeMark of Wizard Tower TechnoServices Ltd. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > 604-682-0300 Beautiful British Columbia, Canada > > This email and any electronic data contained are confidential and intended > solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. > Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely > those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. > _______________________________________________ > 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.
_______________________________________________ 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.
