Indeed, internet drafts at the IETF have built in expiration for an example closer to home.
Owen
That idea speaks for itself. I digress—this isn’t a unique concept; legislatures have long had “selection pressure” baked in. On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 9:39 AM Martin Hannigan <[email protected]> wrote:
> If a draft policy can’t reach recommended status, for whatever reason, within 18 months it automatically dies.
Hi Martin,
Can I ask you to expand on your thinking here? What would such a rule
accomplish? Why is that a good thing?
Are you thinking that the AC doesn't promptly identify when propopals
won't reach consensus and thus abandons them late?
Two notes:
1. When you have a better way than a draft on the docket, nothing in
the PDP prevents a competing policy proposal. The AC could make a hash
of managing it, but the process itself offers no obstruction.
2. Many of the steps in the petition process don't depend on the AC
acting. For example, a draft policy is eligible for a petition to
advance to recommended after it has been active for 90 days,
regardless of AC action or inaction. If, for example, you thought the
AC was dragging its feet on the IPv6 formula corrections, you could
petition that now and give us a good spanking. :)
Regards,
Bill Herrin
|
_______________________________________________
ARIN-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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
