[address-policy-wg] 2016-04 To Last Call (IPv6 Sub-assignment Clarification)

Hi Jordi,

> I participate on IETF, and I know RFC7282, however I fail to see in our PDP that we are bound to that RFC?

As Jim has said, the definition of consensus is determined by consensus :)  And for this working group the chairs apply consensus roughly based on that RFC.

> I also just read again the PDP, and my understanding is that we are doing something different than what the process say, following
> 
> https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-642
> 
> I don’t see how a policy proposal that at the end of the review phase (maximum 4 weeks), has not reached consensus, as the only alternative is a “new” review phase, with a new version of the proposal:
> 
> From the PDP:
> “The WG chair can also decide to have the draft RIPE Document edited and start a new Review Phase with a new version of the proposal.”

In RIPE the chairs are allowed to use common sense and their own judgement when chairing a working group. Please don't try to make rules for everything, we're not lawyers, we're people trying to get work done in the best interests of this community.

Cheers,
Sander