[address-policy-wg] the post-mortem on 2008-08

On 28 Jul 2011, at 09:35, Martin Millnert wrote:

> this message of yours explains for me that you have not really
> understood why or what people are having issues with, with these
> issues.

With respect Martin, you couldn't be more wrong. And anyway the next  
steps are not about what I might or might not understand or the issues  
raised in the last-minute objections to 2008-08. It's also not about  
"cheating the policy process" either. Nobody has suggested it was.  
It's about reconciling two (three?) mutually exclusive community  
decisions.

We have a situation where the membership has authorised the NCC to  
develop an address certification system. This has been going on for  
years. It was the settled will of RIPE too. [Though that goes back to  
the days before the PDP existed.] We've all taken a punt that by the  
time this system was ready, there would be a consensus policy for it  
in place. 2008-08 is now dead. But the current mandate to the NCC is  
still in effect. A vote of the membership is needed to change that  
mandate. In my opinion, this is also the least bad way to proceed.

Please note I did not say what that decision should be. Again.

While you're right in theory to say we could start all over again and  
come up with a new address certification policy, I doubt it will work  
in practice. Positions seem too entrenched on all sides to find a  
compromise. I wonder too if consensus is now possible or if that can  
be reached in a reasonable amount of time. 2008-08 chugged along for 3  
years and was apparently non-controversial.