[address-policy-wg] 2023-04 Review Phase (Add AGGREGATED-BY-LIR status for IPv4 PA assignments)

On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 2:11 PM Tore Anderson <tore at fud.no> wrote:

> Hi Jan,
>
>
Hi Tore,


> On 11/01/24 13:27, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 1:11 PM Tore Anderson <tore at fud.no> wrote:
> >
> >     After all, any LIR which prefers the RIPE NCC interpretation of the
> >     policy in this regard is may simply adhere to it and act accordingly,
> >     and this is commonly done today. Thus the RIPE NCC's
> >     interpretation of
> >     the policy – mistaken or not – ends up becoming the (de facto) way
> >     the
> >     policy is implemented anyway.
> >
> > This statement basically renders the point of a policy working group
> moot.
>
> Not at all. Any working group member who is of the opinion that the RIPE
> NCC is interpreting a RIPE Community policy incorrectly, is free to at
> any point submit a policy proposal that clarifies the allegedly
> misinterpreted policy text with the aim to make the RIPE NCC change its
> procedures accordingly.
>
> The RIPE NCC's Impact Analysis will then reveal whether or not the
> proposed new policy text does attain its goal and that the RIPE NCC will
> change its procedures as desired, should the proposal pass.
>
> Finally, the proposal will need to reach (rough) consensus in order to
> confirm that the RIPE Community does indeed concur with the proposer's
> opinion that the old policy was interpreted incorrectly, and that the
> RIPE NCC's procedures ought to change.
>
> Absent this, the RIPE NCC's operationalisation of the policy will stay
> as-is.
>
>
This would make sense if the argument was not so circular.

I also do not understand what makes it so hard to say that: "Yes, the
current policy does state something else than NCC's interpretation of it
does, and therefore current practice contradicts (or appears to contradict)
policy. However, we, the proposers, believe that the current practice makes
for the best policy, and therefore propose amending the policy to reflect
practice."

-- 
Jan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20240112/1f893797/attachment.html>