[address-policy-wg] the post-mortem on 2008-09

On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 09:57:27AM +0100, Jim Reid wrote:

> dead. There is no policy on address certification. However the NCC has  
> a mandate from the membership through the activity plan to continue  
> with the prototype and its infrastructure. We're in a paradox where  
> the community has killed a policy on address certification while  
> simultaneously authorising the NCC to develop such a system. [Has  

I believe you are drawing the wrong conclusion here.  One of the problems
is that 2008-08 was about the "how", not the "if".  And since the latter
question was probably never asked explicitly through the PDP, the discussion
came up, admittedly late, during the "how" debate on 2008-08.
One of the weaknesses (not failure) of the PDP is that after the proponent
withdraws the proposal, we're stuck for the time being.

> anybody seen Schrodinger's cat wandering around? It must in be here  

Dead cat walking?  The difference is that the AGM can approve the budget for
development and deployment, but once there is agreement the issue is subject to
the PDP there is a risk that there will be no "go" for the deployment and thus
the budget was wasted - which would be very undesirable.  However, it's not
the same community because the two bodies have distinct roles.

-Peter