Re: [arin-ppml] Discussion on elimination of SWIP requirements.

In message , John Curran wrote: >You are of course welcome to avail yourself of the ARIN Consultation and >Suggestion Process (ACSP) Thanks John, but in the absence of even a single "Amen", that would seem to be a rather

Re: [arin-ppml] Discussion on elimination of SWIP requirements.

On 5 Jun 2017, at 7:51 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette > wrote: I can only infer that the lack of a warm reception, within the ARIN community, to this rather simple and easy idea can be largely if not entirely attributed to the community's preference

Re: [arin-ppml] Discussion on elimination of SWIP requirements.

In message <5d171f4e-4bcb-8b54-5788-b48b0235e...@linuxmagic.com>, Michael Peddemors wrote: >PS, what was your personal take on implementing a public reporting of >non-compliance events system, that allowed the public to see what >actions/porgress is/are being made by

Re: [arin-ppml] Discussion on elimination of SWIP requirements.

On 17-06-04 08:46 AM, John Curran wrote: Andrew - Full agreement with your sentiment, but I must make one point quite clear to the community participating in this policy development - As noted earlier, if this community develops and adopts policy regarding how the number registry is to be