Re: [arin-ppml] Revised - Draft Policy ARIN-2020-8: Clarify and Update 4.2.1.2 Annual Renewal Fee

urce were allocated or assigned by predecessors of ARIN and therefore not “by ARIN under these policies”. Furthermore, Registration Services Agreement and RSA are both use in several places in the NRPM, therefore having a clear definition seems like a good idea. On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 18:55 Micha

Re: [arin-ppml] Revised - Draft Policy ARIN-2020-8: Clarify and Update 4.2.1.2 Annual Renewal Fee

Question: Does this change affect in any way the services provided by ARIN to legacy holders who are not under (L)RSA? The new wording proposed for section 2 doesn't seem to account for that category. My thought is to simply delete 4.2.1.2 and be done with it. Does the NRPM need to include a def

Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-3: IPv6 Nano-allocations

I oppose the policy *as worded* for the reason(s) expressed below. On 2020-03-24 10:20, ARIN wrote: > On 19 March 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted > "ARIN-prop-285: IPv6 Nano-allocations" as a Draft Policy. [snip] > Draft Policy ARIN-2020-3: IPv6 Nano-allocations > > Problem Statem

Re: [arin-ppml] Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation

On 2019-04-26 13:54, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML wrote: > Hi Owen, > > So, you believe that if an ARIN member is repeatedly misusing the resources > from another member, is just fine and the ARIN membership which rules are the > policies, should not care about this behavior and members sh

Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN discontinuing DNSSEC capability to legacy holders

On 10/4/18 11:08 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: This is a complicated problem. DNSsec is about identity and is not merely a technical protocol. It requires that trust is built and maintained between the entities in the DNS tree, this trust is structured heretically so that everyone doesn't have to

[arin-ppml] ARIN discontinuing DNSSEC capability to legacy holders

Hi, All of my $employer's number resources are covered by RSA or LRSA, but I have received word of an apparent change in ARIN operational policy from holders of legacy resources who are not 100% covered by RSA or LRSA. The change is that ARIN is (or will soon be) no longer accepting DNSSEC D

Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2017-6: Improve Reciprocity Requirements for Inter RIR Transfers

On 08/23/17 10:56, David Farmer wrote: > You want to break 94% of the transfers between APNIC and ARIN because > you don't like 6% of them.   > > AfriNIC is discussing a similar proposal and a similar proposal was > discussed in LACNIC. > > > Help me understand this, we are going to bre

Re: [arin-ppml] Interesting policy proposal in AFRINIC

On 4/19/17 1:27 PM, Marilson wrote: Susan, At the moment there are 7 messages sent by list members in my inbox (by Brett, Scott, Jason, Kirubel and Josh). All are copied to arin-ppml@arin.net and I received them. If my /messages were posted to ppml for all on the lis

Re: [arin-ppml] RPKI Relying Agreement

On 12/04/2014 10:01, John Curran wrote: > On Dec 4, 2014, at 12:25 PM, Michael Sinatra > wrote: >> >> On 12/04/2014 07:59, John Curran wrote: >>> ... >>> Actually, the terms regarding indemnification and warrant disclaimer are >>> nearly >>&g

Re: [arin-ppml] RPKI Relying Agreement

On 12/04/2014 10:53, John Curran wrote: > On Dec 4, 2014, at 1:12 PM, William Herrin > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:59 AM, John Curran > > wrote: >> > Actually, the terms regarding indemnification and warrant disclaimer >> are nearly >> > i

Re: [arin-ppml] RPKI Relying Agreement

On 12/04/2014 09:33, John Curran wrote: >> Review >> >> >> wherein there is a limitation of liability and requirement that a >> recipient of any digital certificate >> will indemnify APNIC against any and

Re: [arin-ppml] RPKI Relying Agreement

On 12/04/2014 07:59, John Curran wrote: > On Dec 4, 2014, at 10:51 AM, David Huberman > wrote: >> >> Numerous members of the security and network engineering community and I >> have discussed this over the last 12 months, and the RPA is a show stopper >> for some of us. Paragraphs 3 and 4 are

Re: [arin-ppml] Term Limit Proposal

On 03/25/2014 09:15, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 04:05:47PM +, Azinger, Marla wrote: >> >> I believe a balance between familiarity, hitting a productive >> stride, burn out and mind melting needs to be balanced out with >> fresh able minds. I also believe a solid 3 year br

Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles / Request for General Thoughts

On 06/25/2013 20:11, David Farmer wrote: 2) Do you support the principle of hierarchical aggregation (Routability)? Yes, however the need for hierarchical aggregation should be less about who should or shouldn't get allocations and more about ensuring that subsequent allocations are aggregatea

Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles / Request for General Thoughts

On 6/7/13 7:16 AM, Chris Grundemann wrote: Hello all, As the shepherd for ARIN-2013-4, I'd like to note that while the initial conversation on this draft policy was fairly constructive, more recent comments have gone a bit off topic. Rather than debating the history of internet governance it wou