I do not support this policy or petition.
I also don't understand why organizations desiring more than a very small block
have any reasonable expectation of it ever being available from the wait list.
It's like demanding a reserved seat in one of the lifeboats that the Titanic
would have had
Hoo-whee I can't wait to see what happens when Parler puts in a request
for an IP block... ;-)
Ted
On 1/11/2021 8:02 PM, sc...@solarnetone.org wrote:
Hi All,
Does not this type of thing tend to self-regulate? I mean, behaving in a
hostile fashion is going to make it very difficult to find pee
Hi All,
Does not this type of thing tend to self-regulate? I mean, behaving in a
hostile fashion is going to make it very difficult to find peers willing
to help you grow your network, no?
Scott
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021, Seth Mattinen wrote:
On 1/11/21 7:22 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
On 1/11/2
On 1/11/21 7:22 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
On 1/11/21 7:01 PM, John Curran wrote:
Good Evening -
As a reminder, participants on PPML are well-advised to focus their
discussion on the policies under consideration and refrain from foul
language, personal character attacks, or disrespect for
othe
On 1/11/21 7:01 PM, John Curran wrote:
Good Evening -
As a reminder, participants on PPML are well-advised to focus their
discussion on the policies under consideration and refrain from foul
language, personal character attacks, or disrespect for other participants.
I was told offlist that
Good Evening -
As a reminder, participants on PPML are well-advised to focus their discussion
on the policies under consideration and refrain from foul language, personal
character attacks, or disrespect for other participants.
This is required by the ARIN Mailing list Acceptable Use Policy, wh
On 11 Jan 2021, at 10:35 AM, Fernando Frediani
mailto:fhfredi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Obviously anyone has the right to petition, but I am trying to understand the
intent of this appeal. Make the Board of Trustees to push something that
haven't had enough support from the community ?
Fernando -
On 1/11/21 6:20 PM, David Farmer wrote:
During the AC's November 19th meeting, they voted 8 in favor, to 6
against, to recommend this policy to the Board, nevertheless, the motion
failed as the PDP requires 10 votes in favor by the AC to recommend
adoption of a policy to the Board. I think th
I oppose this petition.
-Chris
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 6:21 PM David Farmer wrote:
> There is neither overwhelming support nor overwhelming opposition to this
> policy. There seems to be more support than opposition, however, the level
> of opposition in my opinion makes adopting the policy at
I do not support this policy or petition.
It's very simple; a small group of people stand to gain from 2020-2 at the
expense of the broader community. It is in no way fair.
Those pushing for this policy need to accept that they're not entitled to
anymore than the rest of us.
Regards,
Michael
O
There is neither overwhelming support nor overwhelming opposition to this
policy. There seems to be more support than opposition, however, the level
of opposition in my opinion makes adopting the policy at this time
troublesome. The only thing that seems clear to me, this is a very
contentious poli
On 1/11/21 07:35, Fernando Frediani wrote:
Obviously anyone has the right to petition, but I am trying to
understand the intent of this appeal. Make the Board of Trustees to push
something that haven't had enough support from the community ?
I can't help but feeling specifically targeted by
I support this petition.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 11, 2021, at 8:40 PM, Robert Clarke wrote:
I do not support this policy or petition.
It's very simple; a small group of people stand to gain from 2020-2 at the
expense of the broader community. It is in no way fair and I'm happy to see
th
I do not support this policy or petition.
It's very simple; a small group of people stand to gain from 2020-2 at the
expense of the broader community. It is in no way fair and I'm happy to see
this was shot down by the advisory council.
Those pushing for this policy need to accept that they're
I opposed this policy and DO NOT support this petition.
By our unofficial count of the PPML, there were 30 different organizations that supported this proposal and 13 that did not. Of the 13 voices of dissent, 6 did not voice a word of dissent until last call. That is almost 50% o
I support the petition.
Regards,
Mike Burns
IPTrading.com
From: ARIN-PPML On Behalf Of Fernando Frediani
Sent: Monday, January 11, 2021 10:35 AM
To: arin-ppml@arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Board of Trustees Consideration Petition for ARIN
-2020 -2: Reinstatement of Organizations Removed
Obviously anyone has the right to petition, but I am trying to
understand the intent of this appeal. Make the Board of Trustees to push
something that haven't had enough support from the community ?
It may meet some minimal criteria to be a proposal and be discussed but
it didn't reach enough
I am in support of this petition.
Jason Brandt
Pearl Insurance
Jason
Brandt
Senior Systems Engineer
Pearl Companies | 1200 E Glen Ave Peoria Heights, IL 61616
P: 309.679.0184 F: 309.688.5444 E: jason.bra...@pearlcompanies.com
www.pearlcompanies.com | Insurance - Technology - Automotive
PEARL CO
A petition has been initiated for the following:
ARIN-2020-2: Reinstatement of Organizations Removed from Waitlist by
Implementation of ARIN-2019-16
ARIN-2020-2 reverted to Draft Policy on 6 January following a Last Call period.
Per ARIN's Policy Development Process (PDP), all Recommended
19 matches
Mail list logo
