It has been a week, and there has been no discussion on this thread. I take the silence to mean the suggested "option 2" rewrite is non-controversial and meets all of Bill's concerns.
I also take the silence to mean that all three options I have suggested all result in the same implementation, and since no one believes any of the three options differ in implementation, there is no preference. I humbly submit we should go with option 2, as it is closest to Bill's suggestion, and keeps 8.2 and 8.3 in line (setting the ground work for a future unification of 8.2 and 8.3). Will there be discussion now? Or should we just silently move forward? Thanks, ___Jason On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Jason Schiller <[email protected]> wrote: > Bill, > > Thank you. > > The intent was NOT to remove the requirement for in-region recipients of > transfers to sign an RSA. > > My apologies. > > There is a lot or parallel structure in 8.3 and 8.4 and in my mind 8.4 is > identical to 8.3 except 8.4 has a clause "Except when the recipient is > out of region then that region's policy applies", and " Except when the > source is out of region then that region's policy applies". I really > wanted to completely merge 8.3 and 8.4 to remove the parallel structure but > as an editorial re-write only and not part of this discussion. > > in 8.4 there are a separate bullets for 24-month supply and sign the RSA: > "> Recipients within the ARIN region will be subject to current ARIN > policies and sign an RSA for the resources being received. > > Recipients within the ARIN region must demonstrate the need for up to a > 24-month supply of IPv4 address space." > > I think in my mind I imagined a similar separate bullets in 8.3, one for > 24-month supply and another for sign RSA, and I intended just to remove the > 24 month part. > > I think there are a few ways to fix this. > > Option 1 - minimun rewrtite > - remove only the "24-month" portion of the 8.3 text. This is the minimum > change, but brings section 8.3 and 8.4 further out of alignment > > Option 2 - single bullet for "meet ARIN policy" and "sign RSA" (8.3 as the > model text) > - replace the whole "24-month" text and "meet ARIN policy" text in 8.3 > with a bullet that included "sign the RSA" and "meet ARIN policy" under one > bullet and is parallel to text in 8.4 (minus within the ARIN region) > > Option 3 - two separate bullets for "meet ARIN policy" and "sign RSA" (8.2 > as the model text) > - replace the whole "24-month" text in 8.3 with a bullet that included > "sign the RSA" > -separate the "sign the RSA" and "meet ARIN policy" in 8.4 into two > bullets and is parallel to text in 8.3 (plus the within ARIN region) > > (If the summary of the options are hard to follow I have a suggestion for > the specific rewrites below) > > I think your suggestion is roughly Option 2 below (the only difference is > with your suggested rewrite, there are now two bullets in 8.3 stating the > recipient is subject to current ARIN policies). Assuming all the options > have the same policy implications, I would prefer option 2 or 3, as these > bring greater alignment of the sections. > > Do these options all meet your concern? > > Does the community and ARIN staff agree that the thee options have the > same policy implications? > > > Kevin, David, > > I think at this point you own the text? > I would be supportive of the friendly amendment to modify the draft policy > as follows: > > > OPTION 1: > Replace the following Section 8.3 text: > > "> The recipient must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply > of IP address resources under current ARIN policies and sign an > RSA." > > with: > > "> Recipients will sign an RSA for the resources being received." > > > OPTION 2: > > Replace the following Section 8.3 text: > > "> The recipient must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply > of IP address resources under current ARIN policies and sign an > RSA. > > The resources transferred will be subject to current ARIN policies." > > with: > > "> Recipients will be subject to current ARIN policies and sign an RSA for > the resources being received." > > OPTION 3: > Replace the following Section 8.3 text: > > "> The recipient must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply > of IP address resources under current ARIN policies and sign an > RSA." > > with: > > "> Recipients will sign an RSA for the resources being received." > > and replace the following Section 8.4 text: > > "> Recipients within the ARIN region will be subject to current ARIN > policies and sign an RSA for the resources being received. > > Recipients within the ARIN region must demonstrate the need for up to > a 24-month supply of IPv4 address space." > > With: > > "> Recipients within the ARIN region will sign an RSA for the resources > being received. > > The resources transferred to recipients within the ARIN region will be > subject to current ARIN policies." > > If all the options are indeed the same I would prefer option 2 or 3. > If the options have different policy implications and we can converge on > one standard for both 8.2 and 8.3, then I would prefer that. > > > ___Jason > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Bill Owens <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 04:55:58PM -0400, ARIN wrote: >> > On 28 August 2014 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted >> > "ARIN-prop-212 Transfer policy slow start and simplified needs >> > verification" as a Draft Policy. >> > >> . . . >> > >> > Draft Policy ARIN-2014-20 >> > Transfer Policy Slow Start and Simplified Needs Verification >> > >> > Date: 3 September 2014 >> > >> . . . >> > >> > Policy statement: >> > >> > Remove the following section 8.3 text: >> > >> > "The recipient must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply >> > of IP address resources under current ARIN policies and sign an >> > RSA." >> >> Shouldn't that be something like this, instead? >> >> Replace the following Section 8.3 text: >> >> "The recipient must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply >> of IP address resources under current ARIN policies and sign an >> RSA." >> >> with: >> >> "The recipient will be subject to current ARIN policies and sign an >> RSA for the resources being received." >> >> As written it appears to remove the requirement for recipients of >> in-region transfers to sign an RSA. >> >> Bill. >> _______________________________________________ >> 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. >> > > > > -- > _______________________________________________________ > Jason Schiller|NetOps|[email protected]|571-266-0006 > > -- _______________________________________________________ Jason Schiller|NetOps|[email protected]|571-266-0006
_______________________________________________ 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.
