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/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] what does consensus mean
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] what does consensus mean
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] what does consensus mean
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
jordi.palet at consulintel.es
Tue Jan 16 12:23:05 CET 2018
Hi Jim, See below. Regards, Jordi -----Mensaje original----- De: address-policy-wg <address-policy-wg-bounces at ripe.net> en nombre de Jim Reid <jim at rfc1035.com> Fecha: martes, 16 de enero de 2018, 12:12 Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet at consulintel.es> CC: <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> Asunto: Re: [address-policy-wg] what does consensus mean > On 16 Jan 2018, at 10:40, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> wrote: > > 1) When you believe you agree with a policy proposal and declare it to the list (so chairs can measure consensus), do you “agree” only with the “policy text” or with the arguments written down in the policy proposal, or with the NCC interpretation (impact analysis), or all of them? Depends. IIRC in the past I think I've just supported the proposal and not cared about the arguments behind it or the impact analysis. [Jordi] This has been my main way to evaluate a proposal always, read the policy text and decide upon that, because at the end, is the only one that can be enforced. > 2) What if the text in those 3 pieces are presenting contradictions or can be easily be interpreted in different ways? I would raise those issues and be crystal-clear about where the confusions or ambiguities were. And most likely talk to the WG chairs before taking those concerns to the list. [Jordi] I’m talking with the chairs about that since yesterday, even if I also think is a debate for the list, not just the chairs. Jordi, I think it's not helpful to continue this discussion. If you remain unhappy with the consensus declaration on 2016-04, please use the appeals machinery provided in the PDP instead of wasting everyone's time exploring rat-holes. [Jordi] I think it makes sense to avoid an appeal if we can clarify the situation before that. ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.consulintel.es The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] what does consensus mean
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] what does consensus mean
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]