On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 7:06 PM Joe Provo <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 06:40:19PM -0400, Martin Hannigan wrote: > [snip] > > It is. However, the text in Section 10 has to be agreed by all five RIR's > > which means it goes off to global policy land. Just thinking out of the > > box. Normally, I would agree, but changing section 10 for editorial > changes > > is a problem regardless. > > Then IMO we should incorporate into the developing style guide > "don't touch section 10". > ACK +1 > > > The AC shepherds have the pen, so they certainly can sever the trivial > > > change to section 10 if it is truly believed to trigger the End Times. > > > > > I could be wrong. If it goes forward and I am, beer is on me. But you'll > be > > waiting at least two years in theory. Which is still a waste of time for > > such a change IMHO. However, if it does go forward, count on me to start > > the when is a change a change discussion. > > Point is, the shepherds could trim the section 10 bit and move it > along if non-substantive changes to section 10 is really a problem. > > SGTM. -- > Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header. > Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling >
_______________________________________________ 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.
