[address-policy-wg] status of 2011-02

On 8 December 2011 21:12, Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote:
> If you, the WG, decides that we do not have consensus, the policy proposal
> goes back to "discussion phase", and the proposer will need to work with
> those people that spoke up against the proposal to integrate their ideas,
> and come up with a new version of the policy proposal that might then
> reach consensus.

I don't like the policy as I think its a bad idea (I'd rather IPv4 PI
required multihoming if you want to make PI more 'equal'), but thats
not the question on the slab...

It seems that the majority believe the proposal has merit, that the
majority of those that are against the proposal are actually concerned
about the unintended consequences (table growth) rather than the
policy itself. We have discussed alternatives that would 'brake' the
table growth as part of the change but many have been written off as
unworkable (and possibly a poor policy development idea) so it seems
to me that we are in fact at a consensus *but* that the NCC should be
tasked with monitoring impact and reporting at a fixed point in the
future.

J
-- 

James Blessing
07989 039 476