On 15 Jun 2017, at 5:16 PM, William Herrin 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 8:23 AM, John Curran 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
 If the community feels that ARIN should enforce these
provisions on an on-going basis, then we will make that happen, including
revocation and reissuance of number resources if such is specified.

Hi John,

I'm of the opinion that if nobody minds, it doesn't matter. Thus I'd like to 
see complaint-triggered review of SWIP compliance with some kind of 
"reasonable" threshold for honest error and some kind of escalating penalty for 
repeat offense. Is that policy or business practice?

There’s substantial policy issues in that (e.g. threshold for compliance,
registry implications of penalties) that you should use the policy process
for discussion.  If there is a consensus on a path forward, the ARIN AC
is quite capable of phrasing the final policy with appropriate suggestions
on specifics of implementation (e.g. fees/penalties) that the Board can
then review and ratify as appropriate.

/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN

_______________________________________________
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.

Reply via email to