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/anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net/
[anti-abuse-wg] [policy-announce] 2017-02 Review Phase (Regular abuse-c Validation)
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [policy-announce] 2017-02 Review Phase (Regular abuse-c Validation)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [policy-announce] 2017-02 Review Phase (Regular abuse-c Validation)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Brian Nisbet
brian.nisbet at heanet.ie
Tue Jan 23 10:32:09 CET 2018
On 22/01/2018 16:25, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 04:20:41PM +0000, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote: >> it. (However, since I'm not sure the implementation process >> cannot just change without my consent, I still oppose it on this >> point, too) > > Actually, a question for the chairs on the PDP: Is the > implentation plan a part of the proposal insofar as, should the > policy be adopted, a new proposal is required to make changes to > the process? In short, yes. The impact analysis becomes part of the policy proposal and therefore is also a subset over what the community has to reach consensus. So any significant changes to the implementation would need to be communicated to the WG and also their approval would be needed. To be clear, the changes suggested in this conversation would absolutely be seen as significant changes! Brian Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [policy-announce] 2017-02 Review Phase (Regular abuse-c Validation)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [policy-announce] 2017-02 Review Phase (Regular abuse-c Validation)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]