Marla Azinger

Das BTW-Verzeichnis bündelt öffentliche Datensätze zu Marla Azinger.

Die verfügbaren Daten umfassen Rollen: IP Address Engineer (Electric Lightwave).

Zuletzt beobachtet 2007

Rollen: IP Address Engineer (Electric Lightwave)

Konfidenz

Öffentliche Rolle: Die zitierten öffentlichen Quellen nennen Marla Azinger als Person im Zusammenhang mit Entscheidungen, Verfahren, Governance oder Betrieb der Internet-Infrastruktur; aktuelle Funktion und Zugehörigkeit müssen weiterhin geprüft werden.
Informationstyp: Die dokumentierte öffentliche Rolle, Entscheidungen oder rechtliche Beteiligung von Marla Azinger können Netzinvestitionen, Marktzugang, Infrastrukturpolitik oder Verantwortungsgrenzen beeinflussen; dieses Dossier trennt zitierte Nachweise von der Prüfung der aktuellen Funktion.

Zugehörige Details

Marla Azinger
Azinger, Marla Electric Lightwave
public people profile
Marla Azinger
Hello, my name is Marla Azinger; I work for Frontier Communications, as a senior IP engineer and as the new peering coordinator for 5650.
public people profile
Marla Azinger
IP Address Engineer, Electric IP Address Engineer, Electric LightwaveLightwave, 2002 , 2002 –– 20062006
public people profile

Zuletzt aktualisiert: 2026-10-13

Rollen

Role:IP Address Engineer (Electric Lightwave)· 2002 – 2006Noch nicht bewertetHistorisch

Role:IP Address Engineer (Frontier Communications & Citizens)· 2003Noch nicht bewertetHistorisch

Role:Chair (ARIN Advisory Council)· 2007 – 2007Noch nicht bewertetHistorisch

Role:Member (ARIN Advisory Council)· 2005 – 2007Noch nicht bewertetHistorisch

Role:AS5650 Peering Coordinator (Frontier Communications)· 2007Noch nicht bewertetHistorisch

Role:Member (IETF Routing and Addressing Directorate)· 2007Noch nicht bewertetHistorisch

Quellenbelegte Fakten

Beteiligung an RIR-Richtlinien

1Beteiligte RIRs

8Beteiligte Richtlinien

13Richtliniennachrichten insgesamt

31.03.2004Erste Beteiligung

22.08.2007Letzte Beteiligung

ARIN-2004-32004-3: Global Addresses for Private Network Inter-ConnectivityUnterstützung · 5 Diskussionsbeiträge
Konsistenz der Position: Konsistent
Marla's April 2004 and April 2005 explanations consistently present 2004-3 as clearer wording for a use already permitted. The initial request for both pro and con comments is meeting preparation, not a contrary stance.
2004-3: Global Addresses for Private Network Inter-Connectivity
Bewertung: Konsistent · Marla's April 2004 and April 2005 explanations consistently present 2004-3 as clearer wording for a use already permitted. The initial request for both pro and con comments is meeting preparation, not a contrary stance.
Bedingungen: Her description of historical practice is attributed to her; it does not independently prove every past application decision.
01.04.2004
it just seems it needs to be re-textualized in a very point blank manner.
01.04.2004
This policy is simply striving to achieve clarification.
19.04.2005
Its not a change. Its a clarification.
2004-3: Global Addresses for Private Network Inter-Connectivity · 2005-1: Provider Independent IPv6 Assignments for End-sites
Bewertung: Konsistent · Calling 2004-3 a clarification of existing practice is compatible with accepting that 2005-1 or another policy may later change. The first describes the claimed effect of a particular text; the second concerns the ability to revise policies with reasons and support.
Bedingungen: The proposals and claims have different subjects, so their wording cannot be used to manufacture a reversal.
19.04.2005
Its not a change. Its a clarification.
28.04.2006
Policy is not set in stone and can always be changed if given reason and support to do so.
ARIN-2005-12005-1: Provider Independent IPv6 Assignments for End-sitesUnterstützung · 1 Diskussionsbeiträge
Konsistenz der Position: Die Datenlage reicht nicht aus, um die Konsistenz zu beurteilen.
One contribution regards 2005-1 as a solution to several issues and argues that policy can change when there is reason and support. It does not establish how her position evolved.
2005-1: Provider Independent IPv6 Assignments for End-sites
Bewertung: Die Datenlage reicht nicht aus, um die Konsistenz zu beurteilen. · One contribution regards 2005-1 as a solution to several issues and argues that policy can change when there is reason and support. It does not establish how her position evolved.
Bedingungen: A suggestion that policy motivate technical improvement is not evidence that such improvement occurred.
28.04.2006
I see 2005-1 as one solution for a couple different "issues".
28.04.2006
Policy is not set in stone and can always be changed if given reason and support to do so.
2004-3: Global Addresses for Private Network Inter-Connectivity · 2005-1: Provider Independent IPv6 Assignments for End-sites
Bewertung: Konsistent · Calling 2004-3 a clarification of existing practice is compatible with accepting that 2005-1 or another policy may later change. The first describes the claimed effect of a particular text; the second concerns the ability to revise policies with reasons and support.
Bedingungen: The proposals and claims have different subjects, so their wording cannot be used to manufacture a reversal.
19.04.2005
Its not a change. Its a clarification.
28.04.2006
Policy is not set in stone and can always be changed if given reason and support to do so.
ARIN-2005-62005-6: IPv4 Micro-allocations for Anycast ServicesUnbekannt · 2 Diskussionsbeiträge
Konsistenz der Position: Keine ausdrückliche Position angegeben
ARIN-2007-212007-21: PIv6 for legacy holders with RSA and efficient useUnbekannt · 1 Diskussionsbeiträge
Konsistenz der Position: Die Datenlage reicht nicht aus, um die Konsistenz zu beurteilen.
Marla explicitly remains undecided between encouraging IPv6 adoption and obtaining the return of unused legacy IPv4 blocks. Her reading of the current RSA explains the tension she sees; it is not an unqualified vote for the proposal or proof that her view later changed.
2007-21: PIv6 for legacy holders with RSA and efficient use
Bewertung: Die Datenlage reicht nicht aus, um die Konsistenz zu beurteilen. · Marla explicitly remains undecided between encouraging IPv6 adoption and obtaining the return of unused legacy IPv4 blocks. Her reading of the current RSA explains the tension she sees; it is not an unqualified vote for the proposal or proof that her view later changed.
Bedingungen: This is one contribution represented under both draft and numbered entries. · Her reading of the RSA is attributed to her and is not treated as an independently established legal conclusion.
22.08.2007
Undecided on this one.
22.08.2007
We need anyone that is willing to go to Ipv6 space. But we also need Legacy blocks to be handed back in that arent being used. I feel stuck in the middle.
2005-1: Provider Independent IPv6 Assignments for End-sites · 2007-21: PIv6 for legacy holders with RSA and efficient use
Bewertung: Die Datenlage reicht nicht aus, um die Konsistenz zu beurteilen. · Seeing provider-independent IPv6 policy as useful in 2006 is compatible with being undecided in 2007 about the conditions for legacy holders. The later message still values IPv6 adoption while weighing reclamation and contractual requirements. It does not establish withdrawal of the earlier position, but it also does not provide a settled view on the later proposal.
Bedingungen: Different eligibility conditions must not be collapsed into a single yes-or-no position on IPv6. · A single contribution on each proposal leaves the longer-term comparison limited.
ARIN-2007-222007-22: Expand timeframe of Additional RequestsUnbekannt · 1 Diskussionsbeiträge
Konsistenz der Position: Die Datenlage reicht nicht aus, um die Konsistenz zu beurteilen.
Marla explicitly remains undecided on extending the timeframe for additional requests. She summarizes arguments about aggregation, equal treatment, staff scrutiny and hoarding without adopting either side. A single dated undecided contribution cannot establish stability or reversal.
2007-22: Expand timeframe of Additional Requests
Bewertung: Die Datenlage reicht nicht aus, um die Konsistenz zu beurteilen. · Marla explicitly remains undecided on extending the timeframe for additional requests. She summarizes arguments about aggregation, equal treatment, staff scrutiny and hoarding without adopting either side. A single dated undecided contribution cannot establish stability or reversal.
Bedingungen: The draft and numbered proposal entries refer to the same message; they are not independent positions. · The surrounding original proposal explains the subject but is not her authored endorsement.
22.08.2007
Not sure if I am for or against this one.
22.08.2007
Below is are the pro's and con's I pulled from ppml and I can understand.
22.08.2007
Thus...leading to my indecision at this point.
ARIN-prop-36ARIN-prop-36: Removal of IPv6 Operational Information from NRPMUnbekannt · 1 Diskussionsbeiträge
Konsistenz der Position: Keine ausdrückliche Position angegeben
ARIN-prop-54ARIN-prop-54: PIv6 for legacy holders with RSA and efficient useUnbekannt · 1 Diskussionsbeiträge
Konsistenz der Position: Die Datenlage reicht nicht aus, um die Konsistenz zu beurteilen.
Marla explicitly remains undecided between encouraging IPv6 adoption and obtaining the return of unused legacy IPv4 blocks. Her reading of the current RSA explains the tension she sees; it is not an unqualified vote for the proposal or proof that her view later changed.
ARIN-prop-54: PIv6 for legacy holders with RSA and efficient use
Bewertung: Die Datenlage reicht nicht aus, um die Konsistenz zu beurteilen. · Marla explicitly remains undecided between encouraging IPv6 adoption and obtaining the return of unused legacy IPv4 blocks. Her reading of the current RSA explains the tension she sees; it is not an unqualified vote for the proposal or proof that her view later changed.
Bedingungen: This is one contribution represented under both draft and numbered entries. · Her reading of the RSA is attributed to her and is not treated as an independently established legal conclusion.
22.08.2007
Undecided on this one.
22.08.2007
We need anyone that is willing to go to Ipv6 space. But we also need Legacy blocks to be handed back in that arent being used. I feel stuck in the middle.
ARIN-prop-55ARIN-prop-55: Expand timeframe of Additional RequestsUnbekannt · 1 Diskussionsbeiträge
Konsistenz der Position: Die Datenlage reicht nicht aus, um die Konsistenz zu beurteilen.
Marla explicitly remains undecided on extending the timeframe for additional requests. She summarizes arguments about aggregation, equal treatment, staff scrutiny and hoarding without adopting either side. A single dated undecided contribution cannot establish stability or reversal.
ARIN-prop-55: Expand timeframe of Additional Requests
Bewertung: Die Datenlage reicht nicht aus, um die Konsistenz zu beurteilen. · Marla explicitly remains undecided on extending the timeframe for additional requests. She summarizes arguments about aggregation, equal treatment, staff scrutiny and hoarding without adopting either side. A single dated undecided contribution cannot establish stability or reversal.
Bedingungen: The draft and numbered proposal entries refer to the same message; they are not independent positions. · The surrounding original proposal explains the subject but is not her authored endorsement.
22.08.2007
Not sure if I am for or against this one.
22.08.2007
Below is are the pro's and con's I pulled from ppml and I can understand.
22.08.2007
Thus...leading to my indecision at this point.