[address-policy-wg] 2015-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)

Hi Marco,

> I would also like to respond to the point that both you and Matthew made about the RIPE NCC taking a more liberal approach in our interpretation. 
> There is a balance to be struck here, between allowing for corner cases, and the requirements being clearly listed and adhered to. Our understanding
> in the impact analysis is based both on our previous experience with IPv6 requests and our interpretation of the policy text. If the community would 
> like us to take a more liberal approach, we will need some additional guidelines on how to evaluate the requests in the proposed policy text.

Perhaps this is where the difficulty lies... A liberal approach generally presupposes the absence of rules and/or precise definition and so trying to put specifics into policy to promote such an approach may be counter-productive. On that basis I think I'd prefer not to see the proposed policy text containing even more detail than it does now.

I guess this is where the Impact Analysis, and its publication, plays such a key role - it helps form a common understanding between RIPE NCC and the community as to how the policy can/will be implemented without requiring the policy text to be so specific. Taking this a step further it can also allow for a pragmatic approach to be taken where necessary and appropriate i.e. it captures the spirit of the law as opposed to the letter.

Mathew