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/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] ripe-587, Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] ripe-587, Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] ripe-587, Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Fri Jan 28 16:04:33 CET 2022
> On 28 Jan 2022, at 11:20, Daniel Karrenberg <dfk at ripe.net> wrote: > > How about giving the RIPE NCC discretion to make sensible decisions about the corner case ‘scientific experiment’ after getting advice from a panel of scientists? > Or delegating the decisions to such a panel? This would be a pragmatic, common sense solution. However I fear it would open up a new rat-hole for yet more shed-painting. Says me mixing my metaphors... There would be endless discussion on how this panel of experts gets chosen and who’s eligible or not, how they’re accountable (and to whom), who gets to choose, what the appeals process should be and how that’s invoked, etc, etc. Which brings us back to the point you made yesterday Daniel: huge amounts of effort for very little reward. I hope a pragmatic, common sense solution can be found. If not, I think we should just freeze the current policy on v4 and reject any further proposals unless there is a unanimous community consensus to reopen that can of worms. IMO v4 is done. Get over it.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] ripe-587, Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] ripe-587, Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]