I am in support of the policy .
Hugh Downer Network Engineer Core Data [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Office : 1-786-274-8633 | Mob: 1-786-479-7133 1631 NW 136th Ave, Building F, Sunrise, FL, 33323 www.lla.com<http://www.lla.com/> [cid:[email protected]] From: ARIN-PPML <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Rudolph Daniel Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 3:17 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: / Implementation of ARIN-2019-16 ★ External Email ★ ________________________________ I am in support of the policy as written. However, what is the rationale for /18 instead of /20 criteria? Rudi Daniel danielcharles consulting<http://www.facebook.com/pages/Kingstown-Saint-Vincent-and-the-Grenadines/DanielCharles/153611257984774> 1 784 430 9235 ........ict4d........ On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 12:21 PM <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ARIN-PPML digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering ofOrganizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16 (=?utf-8?B?SGF5ZWUgQm9raGFyaQ==?=) 2. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16 (Mike Burns) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 12:15:45 -0400 From: "=?utf-8?B?SGF5ZWUgQm9raGFyaQ==?=" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> To: "=?utf-8?B?RmVybmFuZG8gRnJlZGlhbmk=?=" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "=?utf-8?B?YXJpbi1wcG1s?=" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering ofOrganizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16 Message-ID: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Organizations in the waiting list went to ARIN's vetting process before they got into waiting list, so justification already exist, Regards Hayee Bokhari 514-341-1579 Ex 212 800-427-6012 Ex 212 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://www.cronomagic.com >What is the justification to give organization who already have some >reasonable space to work with, more space in current times ? > >Everybody is suffering from the same problem of IPv4 scarcity and that >affects all equally. If we have already a policy that limits on /20 it >is for a reason, a fair reason by the way. So why are we going to bend >it in this case in the other direction ? >I see this type of proposal privileging just a few rather than been >equalized to all others. > >Therefore I keep opposed to it. > >Fernando > >On 17/07/2020 12:24, Steven Ryerse via ARIN-PPML wrote: >> +1 >> >> >> Steven Ryerse >> President >> >> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> | C: >> 770.656.1460 >> 100 Ashford Center North | Suite 110 | Atlanta, Georgia 30338 >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ARIN-PPML >> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of >> Mike Burns >> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 10:59 AM >> To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; >> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of >> Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16 >> >> I support the policy as written and I do not believe we should prioritize >> small holders over large holders. >> Large holders pay higher fees but I don't see the rationale behind favoring >> small holders on the wait list. >> All holders should be on equal footing, we never had a new-entrant reserve >> at ARIN and I think if that is something we want to do, it should be >> discussed openly and not inserted through the back door of waitlist policy. >> >> Regards, >> Mike >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ARIN-PPML >> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of >> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >> Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 7:59 AM >> To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of >> Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16 >> >> I am also against this proposal. >> >> If we allow holders of larger blocks back onto the list, we take away blocks >> that should go to smaller holders. >> >> The waiting list is NOT a lottery to be "won", and I think the policy should >> not change. >> >> Albert Erdmann >> Network Administrator >> Paradise On Line Inc. >> >> >> On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Andrew Dul wrote: >> >>> I do not support the reintroduction of organizations onto the >>> wait-list who were removed due to having existing address holdings >>> larger than a /20.? Being on the wait-list was never a guarantee that >>> you would receive space.? The AC had to balance the various elements >>> of >> block size and organizations who would be eligible to receive space under >> the updated policy and we were aware that the rules as implemented would >> prevent some organizations on the wait-list from receiving blocks going >> forward. >>> Speaking only for myself, not the AC >>> >>> Andrew >>> >>> On 6/19/2020 11:25 AM, Alyssa Moore wrote: >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> There was some great discussion of this policy proposal at ARIN45. >> We hear a wide range of views including: >>> 1. Don't grandfather organizations. The new waitlist policy is >> sound. >>> 2. Organizations that were on the waitlist before 2019-16 >>> should be >> eligible for their original request size (even if it exceeds the new limit >>> of a /22). >>> 3. Organizations that were on the waitlist before 2019-16 >>> should >> remain eligible if their holdings exceed a /20 OR a /18. The draft policy >>> under discussion specifies a?/18 total holdings for >> grandfathered orgs, while the current waitlist policy (2019-16) specifies a >> /20. >>> 4. Organizations that were on the waitlist before 2019-16 >>> should be >> eligible regardless of their total holdings because that was not a >>> restriction of the policy under which they originally >>> qualified >> for the waitlist. >>> ?There was general support to continue finessing this draft. If >>> you >> have views on the above noted parameters, please make them known here. >>> For reference: >>> >>> Old waitlist policy >>> 1. Requester specifies smallest block they'd be willing to accept, >>> equal >> to or larger than the applicable minimum size specified elsewhere in ARIN >>> policy. >>> 2. Did not place a limit on the total existing IP address holdings of >>> a >> party eligible for the waitlist. >>> 3. Made resources issued from the waitlist ineligible for transfer >>> until after a period of 12 months. New Waitlist Policy 1. Limits the >>> size of block ARIN can issue on the waitlist to a /22. >>> 2. Places a limit on the total existing IP address holdings of a >>> party >> eligible for the waitlist at a /20 or less. >>> 3. Makes resources issued from the waitlist ineligible for transfer >>> until after a period of 60 months. >>> >>> Best, >>> Alyssa >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 3:35 PM David Farmer >>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> I support this policy and believe the policy development process >>> is >> the proper place to handle this issue. However, this policy seems to >>> be implementable?as a one-time policy directive to ARIN Staff. >>> Once >> implemented, by putting the effected?organizations?back on the waiting >>> list, it seems unnecessary to memorialized the text in the NRPM, >>> it >> would immediately become extraneous and potentially?confusing to >>> future readers of the NRPM. >>> Therefore, I would like?to recommend the Policy Statement?not be added >>> to the NRPM upon its implementation. I believe this to be?consistent >>> with >> the intent of the policy.? Otherwise, does ARIN Staff have procedural advice >> on how best to handle what seems like a one-time directive? >>> Thanks >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 12:21 PM ARIN <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations >>> Removed >> from >>> Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16 >>> >>> Problem Statement: >>> >>> The implementation of the ARIN-2019-16 Advisory Council >> Recommendation >>> Regarding NRPM 4.1.8: Unmet Requests caused some organizations to be >>> removed from the waiting list that were approved under the old >> policy?s >>> eligibility criteria. These organizations should have been >> grandfathered >>> when the waitlist was reopened to allow them to receive an >> allocation of >>> IPv4 up to the new policy?s maximum size constraint of a /22. >>> >>> Policy Statement: Update NRPM Section 4.1.8 as follows: >>> >>> Add section 4.1.8.3 (temporary language in the NRPM to remain >>> until >> the >>> policy objective is achieved) >>> >>> Restoring organizations to the waitlist >>> >>> ARIN will restore organizations that were removed from the >>> waitlist >> at >>> the adoption of ARIN-2019-16 to their previous position if their >> total >>> holdings of IPv4 address space amounts to a /18 or less. The maximum >>> size aggregate that a reinstated organization may qualify for is >>> a >> /22. >>> All restored organizations extend their 2 year approval by >>> [number >> of >>> months between July 2019 and implementation of new policy]. Any >> requests >>> met through a transfer will be considered fulfilled and removed >>> from >> the >>> waiting list. >>> >>> Comments: >>> >>> Timetable for implementation: Immediate >>> >>> Anything Else: While attending ARIN 44 and discussing this with >> other >>> community members the vast majority indicated that they agreed >>> that >> some >>> organizations were treated unfairly. This proposal is a remedy. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ARIN-PPML >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List >>> ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>). >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>> >>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.arin.net%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2farin-ppml&c=E,1,itejYWK1neA4HwQI2654uD6T84LDr-jtyvegBUSRLaqI3i7cGDsXGSLO9kZFAeEqibHLpNp9IQUPINbrQtts-4t2a9DQNRIijWuYbVTpZdvZJI2YmIU7zQMg&typo=1 >>> Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you experience >>> any issues. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> =============================================== >>> David Farmer? ? ? ? ? ? ?? >>> Email:[email protected]<mailto:email%[email protected]> Networking & >>> Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University >>> of Minnesota >>> 2218 University Ave SE? ? ? ? Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN >>> 55414-3029?? Cell: 612-812-9952 >>> =============================================== >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ARIN-PPML >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN >>> Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>). >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.arin.net%2fm >>> ailman%2flistinfo%2farin-ppml&c=E,1,pr8_yOATR6fbNAoiwPjuIuQtJCW1Nm7qlk >>> KG7uppvzhqUtK33qz6GCTJCwHGGeKePdcEaJZZdUUw-RTujqMB1FJ2DG6HTd2r6GM5s4Hy >>> nLV4b0vI3AnQPQ,,&typo=1 Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >>> if you experience >>> any issues. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ARIN-PPML >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN >>> Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>). >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.arin.net%2fm >>> ailman%2flistinfo%2farin-ppml&c=E,1,RsBXYYW2wGypb0Y4GbeHTbKFC2827Z3jsp >>> at1aezQl0yTqcY6d2pTdFdOAraqUCnPZ-okcO1-ObFc2thTsKxGhJ1eTCN_Cv8UpPoW80d >>> 6gOeCMy96nbc8z4g0yY0&typo=1 Please contact >>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you >>> experience any issues. >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> ARIN-PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public >> Policy Mailing List ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.arin.net%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2farin-ppml&c=E,1,PZT3k6xZlfRBghEBxxufd4mu2Ve_KsVjNFFbz6LOCh9lpSIRtyNyDCvryXvevPimoqYvm4gDqykjaXQTjrj8V6QM-AY3-lYKC-1oXXBA-awSsCEN&typo=1 >> Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you experience any >> issues. >> _______________________________________________ >> ARIN-PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List >> ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >> Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you experience any >> issues. >_______________________________________________ >ARIN-PPML >You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List >([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>). >Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you experience any >issues. Notice This communication is intended to be received only by the individual[s] or entity[s] to whom or to which it is addressed, and contains information which is confidential, privileged and subject to copyright. Any unauthorized use, copying, review or disclosure is prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately if you have received this communication in error [by calling collect, if necessary] so that we can arrange for its return at our expense. Thank you in advance for your anticipated assistance and cooperation. Cette communication est destin?e uniquement ? la personne ou ? la personne morale ? qui elle est adress?e. Elle contient de l'information confidentielle, prot?g?e par le secret professionnel et sujette ? des droits d'auteurs. Toute utilisation, reproduction, consultation ou divulgation non autoris?es sont interdites. Nous vous prions d'aviser imm?diatement l'exp?diteur si vous avez re?u cette communication par erreur (en appelant ? frais vir?s, si n?cessaire), afin que nous puissions prendre des dispositions pour en assurer le renvoi ? nos frais. Nous vous remercions ? l'avance de votre coop?ration. ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 12:20:49 -0400 From: "Mike Burns" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> To: "'Fernando Frediani'" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16 Message-ID: <[email protected]<http://iptrading.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hi Fernando, What is the justification to favor small holders over large holders? As you say, scarcity affects all equally. The bending of policy occurred behind the scenes in an Advisory Council meeting. Regards, Mike -----Original Message----- From: ARIN-PPML <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of Fernando Frediani Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 12:01 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16 What is the justification to give organization who already have some reasonable space to work with, more space in current times ? Everybody is suffering from the same problem of IPv4 scarcity and that affects all equally. If we have already a policy that limits on /20 it is for a reason, a fair reason by the way. So why are we going to bend it in this case in the other direction ? I see this type of proposal privileging just a few rather than been equalized to all others. Therefore I keep opposed to it. Fernando On 17/07/2020 12:24, Steven Ryerse via ARIN-PPML wrote: > +1 > > > Steven Ryerse > President > > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> | C: > 770.656.1460 > 100 Ashford Center North | Suite 110 | Atlanta, Georgia 30338 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ARIN-PPML > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of > Mike Burns > Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 10:59 AM > To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of > Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16 > > I support the policy as written and I do not believe we should prioritize > small holders over large holders. > Large holders pay higher fees but I don't see the rationale behind favoring > small holders on the wait list. > All holders should be on equal footing, we never had a new-entrant reserve at > ARIN and I think if that is something we want to do, it should be discussed > openly and not inserted through the back door of waitlist policy. > > Regards, > Mike > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ARIN-PPML > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 7:59 AM > To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of > Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16 > > I am also against this proposal. > > If we allow holders of larger blocks back onto the list, we take away blocks > that should go to smaller holders. > > The waiting list is NOT a lottery to be "won", and I think the policy should > not change. > > Albert Erdmann > Network Administrator > Paradise On Line Inc. > > > On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Andrew Dul wrote: > >> I do not support the reintroduction of organizations onto the >> wait-list who were removed due to having existing address holdings >> larger than a /20. Being on the wait-list was never a guarantee that >> you would receive space. The AC had to balance the various elements >> of > block size and organizations who would be eligible to receive space under the > updated policy and we were aware that the rules as implemented would prevent > some organizations on the wait-list from receiving blocks going forward. >> Speaking only for myself, not the AC >> >> Andrew >> >> On 6/19/2020 11:25 AM, Alyssa Moore wrote: >> Hi folks, >> >> There was some great discussion of this policy proposal at ARIN45. > We hear a wide range of views including: >> 1. Don't grandfather organizations. The new waitlist policy >> is > sound. >> 2. Organizations that were on the waitlist before 2019-16 >> should be > eligible for their original request size (even if it exceeds the new > limit >> of a /22). >> 3. Organizations that were on the waitlist before 2019-16 >> should > remain eligible if their holdings exceed a /20 OR a /18. The draft > policy >> under discussion specifies a /18 total holdings for > grandfathered orgs, while the current waitlist policy (2019-16) specifies a > /20. >> 4. Organizations that were on the waitlist before 2019-16 >> should be > eligible regardless of their total holdings because that was not a >> restriction of the policy under which they originally >> qualified > for the waitlist. >> There was general support to continue finessing this draft. >> If you > have views on the above noted parameters, please make them known here. >> For reference: >> >> Old waitlist policy >> 1. Requester specifies smallest block they'd be willing to accept, >> equal > to or larger than the applicable minimum size specified elsewhere in > ARIN >> policy. >> 2. Did not place a limit on the total existing IP address holdings >> of a > party eligible for the waitlist. >> 3. Made resources issued from the waitlist ineligible for transfer >> until after a period of 12 months. New Waitlist Policy 1. Limits the >> size of block ARIN can issue on the waitlist to a /22. >> 2. Places a limit on the total existing IP address holdings of a >> party > eligible for the waitlist at a /20 or less. >> 3. Makes resources issued from the waitlist ineligible for transfer >> until after a period of 60 months. >> >> Best, >> Alyssa >> >> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 3:35 PM David Farmer >> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> I support this policy and believe the policy development >> process is > the proper place to handle this issue. However, this policy seems to >> be implementable as a one-time policy directive to ARIN Staff. >> Once > implemented, by putting the effected organizations back on the waiting >> list, it seems unnecessary to memorialized the text in the >> NRPM, it > would immediately become extraneous and potentially confusing to >> future readers of the NRPM. >> Therefore, I would like to recommend the Policy Statement not be >> added to the NRPM upon its implementation. I believe this to be >> consistent with > the intent of the policy. Otherwise, does ARIN Staff have procedural advice > on how best to handle what seems like a one-time directive? >> Thanks >> >> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 12:21 PM ARIN <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> >> wrote: >> >> Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of Organizations >> Removed > from >> Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16 >> >> Problem Statement: >> >> The implementation of the ARIN-2019-16 Advisory Council > Recommendation >> Regarding NRPM 4.1.8: Unmet Requests caused some organizations to be >> removed from the waiting list that were approved under the old > policy?s >> eligibility criteria. These organizations should have been > grandfathered >> when the waitlist was reopened to allow them to receive an > allocation of >> IPv4 up to the new policy?s maximum size constraint of a /22. >> >> Policy Statement: Update NRPM Section 4.1.8 as follows: >> >> Add section 4.1.8.3 (temporary language in the NRPM to remain >> until > the >> policy objective is achieved) >> >> Restoring organizations to the waitlist >> >> ARIN will restore organizations that were removed from the >> waitlist > at >> the adoption of ARIN-2019-16 to their previous position if >> their > total >> holdings of IPv4 address space amounts to a /18 or less. The maximum >> size aggregate that a reinstated organization may qualify for >> is a > /22. >> All restored organizations extend their 2 year approval by >> [number > of >> months between July 2019 and implementation of new policy]. >> Any > requests >> met through a transfer will be considered fulfilled and >> removed from > the >> waiting list. >> >> Comments: >> >> Timetable for implementation: Immediate >> >> Anything Else: While attending ARIN 44 and discussing this >> with > other >> community members the vast majority indicated that they agreed >> that > some >> organizations were treated unfairly. This proposal is a remedy. >> _______________________________________________ >> ARIN-PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List >> ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.arin.net%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2farin-ppml&c=E,1,itejYWK1neA4HwQI2654uD6T84LDr-jtyvegBUSRLaqI3i7cGDsXGSLO9kZFAeEqibHLpNp9IQUPINbrQtts-4t2a9DQNRIijWuYbVTpZdvZJI2YmIU7zQMg&typo=1 >> Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you experience >> any issues. >> >> >> >> -- >> =============================================== >> David Farmer >> Email:[email protected]<mailto:email%[email protected]> Networking & >> Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology >> University of Minnesota >> 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN >> 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 >> =============================================== >> _______________________________________________ >> ARIN-PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN >> Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.arin.net%2f >> m >> ailman%2flistinfo%2farin-ppml&c=E,1,pr8_yOATR6fbNAoiwPjuIuQtJCW1Nm7ql >> k >> KG7uppvzhqUtK33qz6GCTJCwHGGeKePdcEaJZZdUUw-RTujqMB1FJ2DG6HTd2r6GM5s4H >> y >> nLV4b0vI3AnQPQ,,&typo=1 Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >> if you >> experience any issues. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ARIN-PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN >> Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.arin.net%2f >> m >> ailman%2flistinfo%2farin-ppml&c=E,1,RsBXYYW2wGypb0Y4GbeHTbKFC2827Z3js >> p >> at1aezQl0yTqcY6d2pTdFdOAraqUCnPZ-okcO1-ObFc2thTsKxGhJ1eTCN_Cv8UpPoW80 >> d >> 6gOeCMy96nbc8z4g0yY0&typo=1 Please contact >> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you >> experience any issues. >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public > Policy Mailing List ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.arin.net%2fm > ailman%2flistinfo%2farin-ppml&c=E,1,PZT3k6xZlfRBghEBxxufd4mu2Ve_KsVjNF > Fbz6LOCh9lpSIRtyNyDCvryXvevPimoqYvm4gDqykjaXQTjrj8V6QM-AY3-lYKC-1oXXBA > -awSsCEN&typo=1 Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you > experience any > issues. > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN > Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you experience any > issues. _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you experience any issues. ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml ------------------------------ End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 181, Issue 18 ****************************************** [https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif]<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free. www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
_______________________________________________ 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.
