Christian Kuhtz wrote:
I second that notion. With all due respect, this voting business is a ridiculous notion in this issue.
Which is the primary reason that the ARIN AC exists; to represent the members' views through policy recommendations to the board. This specific issue came to a head at the AC meeting in Calgary, so it made sense to bring the issue to the attention of the membership at that time. The issue had been circulating for some time. Perhaps we need to develop a better process for getting feedback on policy recommendations. Perhaps a discussion period on the ppml@arin.net is called for? Hrm, this really doesn't have much to do with NANOG any more, and is better suited for ppml@arin.net. Anybody who wants to participate further should subscribe to that list, as I'm signing off of this thread on the NANOG list. Alec -- Alec H. Peterson - ahp@hilander.com Staff Scientist CenterGate Research Group - http://www.centergate.com "Technology so advanced, even _we_ don't understand it!"