[address-policy-wg] FW: Policy Reciprocity

 It is not only address policy they can veto. Correct me if I am mistaken, but I understood they can veto any policy they don't like. The internet is critical infrastructure that impacts the lives of almost every human on the planet (and non human lives). It is an essential tool but cyberspace is also a dangerous world. We should not have a group of untouchables in a system based on cooperation and consensus.

"Either way it's irrelevant because it's not really possible to back out of this sort of policy arrangement.

The most sensible approach in the circumstances is leave it and move on."
This attitude will not work indefinitely. At some point legislators will step in. When you have the power to impose rules you don't need a time machine.
cheersdenis
    On Wednesday, 21 October 2020, 13:16:35 CEST, Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:  
 
 Jim Reid wrote on 21/10/2020 09:32:
> Fair enough Shane. [Though I don’t agree legacy space is/was a
> mistake.] However nobody can rewind history. So until someone invents
> time travel, we just have to live with what you think was a mistake.
more to the point, the legacy policy resources document says that if 
RIPE community policy is created or updated, it only applies to legacy 
address space if the policy says so explicitly.

The consequence of this is that legacy address holders can easily veto 
any future changes to legacy address policy that they don't like.

Some people think this is a great idea; other don't and feel this was a 
mistake.  Either way it's irrelevant because it's not really possible to 
back out of this sort of policy arrangement.

The most sensible approach in the circumstances is leave it and move on.

Nick

  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20201021/f520a101/attachment.html>