On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 5:49 PM Joe Provo <p...@rsuc.gweep.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 02:42:45PM -0800, Owen DeLong wrote: > > [really big snips] > > > > > > > > In the interest of both simplification and striving to eliminate > > > the fee or contract details within policy, I'm a fan of Mr Woodfield's > > > suggestion for simple generalization. What do folks think about: > > > > > > 2.X Registration Services Agreement (RSA) > > > > > > Number resources allocated or assigned by ARIN under these policies are > > > subject to a contractural agreement between ARIN and the resource > holder. > > > Throughout this document, any and all forms of this agreement, past or > > > future, is simply referred to as the Registration Services Agreement > > > (RSA). This agreement covers terms, rights, responsibilities and > > > conditions of service; failure to adhere to the RSA may result in > > > revocation of number resources. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Joe > > > > I like it, but I suggest ??????are simply referred to by the term > Registration Services Agreement (RSA)?????? > > > > Alternatively, ??????each and every form of this agreement (past, > present, and future), is referred to as?????? > > > > I would leave off the last sentence. It gets into spelling out what???s > contained in the RSA which I believe is out of scope for the PDP. > > > > To clarify, proposed alternate version: > > > > 2.X Registration Services Agreement (RSA) > > Number resources allocated or assigned by ARIN under these policies are > > subject to a contractural agreement between ARIN and the resource > holder. > > Throughout this document, any and all forms of this agreement, past or > > future, are simply referred to as the Registration Services Agreement > > (RSA). > > > SGTM but there was previous discussion indicating people didn't want > to trim the references to consequences [see August thread and ARIN46 > discussion]. Personally, I do not believe it belongs in the NRPM but > am amenable if the community thinks it does. > > Hopefully this will trigger some more feedback from the community. :-) > [ clip ] The RSA seem to already cover this in detail. 14(c) seems to be the kneecapping this appears to want to help provide. $0.02 Best regards, -M<
_______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.