[address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Clean up)

On Aug 6, 2013, at 8:09 PM, David Farmer wrote:

> On 8/6/13 10:20 , Hans Petter Holen wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> another question is if rfc2050 is "binding" and "limiting" for the RIRs and
>> if draft-housley is going to be it may have go go trough some RIR
>> processes too?
> 
> I never said RFC 2050 is binding on the RIR's.  I've been saying it articulates fairness and why operational need is important.  RIPE and any other RIRs can and have ignored many parts of it, and are fee to continue to do so.
> 
> However, RFC 2050 and the upcoming 2050-bis are the only common statement of goals or principles other than ICP-2 that there is for the Internet Registry System and the RIRs as a whole.  If we ignore those goals and principles, without careful consideration, bad things are likely to happen.

I always think that 2050 is just reflect current situation and don't define any goals and principles
If you will insist that it should be policy document it will break the whole RIR PDP bottom-up system.

> 
> If you are suggesting it would be a good thing for there to be a common set of goals and/or principles for all the RIRs that have gone through the RIR's policy processes or maybe the global policy process, that may not be a bad idea.

It is how existing system works.

Dmitry