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] status of 2011-02
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] status of 2011-02
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] status of 2011-02
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Thu Jan 5 13:57:56 CET 2012
Dear AP WG, On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 10:12:34PM +0100, I wrote: > - but the *WG* has the last word on any policy decision, so we call > for two weeks of "Last Call" on this decision > > Procedure-wise, this is not about the *content* of the proposal now, and > it's not useful to repeat the discussion about routing table growth etc. > now - we've heard all arguments. What we need to decide now is whether > the voices from the community so far form "rough consensus" on the > proposal, or not. Looking at all the messages that have been posted in the discussions following my e-mails, I categorize your feedback as follows: - explicit statements of "we have consensus": (Scott Leibrand, Sascha Lenz, Florian Fuessl, James Blessing, Jasper Jans, Randy Bush, Dan Luedtke, Thomas Schallar, Sascha Luck, [Nina Bargisen]) - statements of "we do not have consensus" (Immo Wehrenberg, on the assumption that consensus has to be unanimous Remco Van Mook) - side-discussions about "what is consensus" (Randy Bush, Immo, Nick Hilliard, Jim Reid, Peter Koch, Turchanyi Geza, Sascha Lenz, Thomas Schallar, Randy Bush) - comments about the content of the proposal, and/or routing technology, and not answering the question asked (Lutz Donnerhacke, Turchanyi Geza, Jan Zorz, Sander Steffann, Nick Hilliard, Turchanyi Geza, Erik Bais, Randy Bush, Vladislav Potapov, Hendrik Voelker, Masataka Ohta, Remco Van Mook) Given that only two voices explicitely said "we have no consensus", and quite a number of people backed the decision by the AP WG chairs to declare consensus, we stick to our decision. What happens next: - the proposal goes back to the Working Group Chairs collective for the final decision (as per PDP, ripe-500, 2.4 / 3rd paragraph) - if they agree on that, the proposal will become policy If you strongly believe that process has not been followed and there was no consensus, the RIPE PDP (http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-500) has an appeals procedure (Appendix A, 3.3), in which case the RIPE chair will have the last word). Gert Doering -- APWG Chair -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] status of 2011-02
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] status of 2011-02
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]