Hi Owen,
El 27/4/19 9:00, "Owen DeLong" <[email protected]> escribió:
Speaking only as a member of the community and based only on my
understanding of the PDP from reading it on the ARIN web site. If ARIN staff,
the board, or the chair of the AC have a differing opinion, my words below
should be considered in err.
Close… You are absolutely correct that the petition is not about the
proposal’s merits (or lack thereof).
In this case, the petition is actually to request that the ARIN Board
review the AC decision. If the ARIN board reverses the AC decision that the
proposal is out of scope, I believe it goes onto the AC Docket as a draft
policy, though I’m not 100% sure whether it then remains under the editorial
control of the authors (as would be the case for a petition against abandonment
or delay) or whether it goes under the editorial control of the AC as is the
case with a draft policy that didn’t become a draft through the petition
process.
Authors already have a new version ready (being published in RIPE in a matter
of hours/days), so it will be the logic thing, that if the petition is
accepted, we can update it. I think this is in the scope of the PDP.
To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time this particular type of
petition has been exercised.
It is possible that the board will uphold the AC decision, in which case, I
believe that’s the end of the process and the proposal remains off the docket.
This is documented in section 3.2.1 of the PDP available at
https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/#2-valid-petitions
Having read that several times (and it is not a very clear process, and have
clear failures, such as 5 natural days for the petition, including weekend,
bank holidays, etc. ... in this case also the 1st of those days was national
holiday for one of the authors, and the last day is holiday in many countries),
and to be honest, as already said, I don't link this process vs other RIRs PDPs
(which of course aren't perfect, but at least they are not being a
"representative" system for the community).
I hope this is helpful information.
Owen
> On Apr 26, 2019, at 23:44 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Michel,
>
> This proposal is being discussed already in RIPE and LACNIC and we are
working in the relevant changes for versions to be submitted in AFRINIC and
APNIC.
>
> As I understand the petition process is not for the proposal merits, but
just to be able to follow the process with it, so it can be discussed in the
list.
>
> Regards,
> Jordi
>
> El 27/4/19 4:02, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de Michel Py"
<[email protected] en nombre de [email protected]>
escribió:
>
>> Bill Herrin wrote :
>> I oppose the proposed policy, but I think it reasonable for us to
occasionally
>> discuss and evaluate whether ARIN should be Internet-Cop in some novel
new way.
>
> I oppose the proposed policy because I have very little faith in ARIN
being Internet-Cop in some novel new way that I have not seen yet.
> Occasionally discuss sounds good, but what is novel here ? For this to
work, it would have to be a joint all-RIR effort. I don't see any traction
here, would someone comment on similar proposals in the other RIRs ?
>
> Michel
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
>
>
>
>
> **********************************************
> IPv4 is over
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> http://www.theipv6company.com
> The IPv6 Company
>
> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the
individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure,
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be
considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the
original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the
individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure,
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be
considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the
original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
_______________________________________________
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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
