This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] Discussion standards
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 Last Call for Comments (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-02 Review Period extended until 23 August 2011 (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6 PI)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sander Steffann
sander at steffann.nl
Mon Aug 8 17:09:57 CEST 2011
Hello working group, Declaration of hats: speaking on behalf of the chairs of this working group: Gert Döring and myself. We have noticed that in the last months a lot of messages about policy proposals contain assumptions, feelings and expectations. While these can be very important in a discussion it is very hard to discuss such statements. Too much of this and it can make policy development nearly impossible. If we want to make good decisions and work towards consensus we need to raise our standards a bit. I want to ask everybody here to add supporting facts, numbers, statistics or other data wherever possible. That doesn't mean that nobody should express their doubts or opinions! All input is still welcome. But please be aware that when trying to judge if consensus has been reached we might give less weight to input that has no data backing it. Thank you, Sander Steffann APWG Co-chair
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 Last Call for Comments (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-02 Review Period extended until 23 August 2011 (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6 PI)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]