[diversity] Requesting Impact Analysis + Legal Review from the RIPE NCC on CoC 2.0

Rob, Brian, all,

Agreed that it seems this work falls into a gray area and that we need 
more clarity on where the CoC falls into on the RIPE accountability map.

Clarity is always a good thing, so while the process may be delayed, I 
think we have probably helped in terms of finding a gap in the 
documentation/expectations on something that isn't PDP, isn't a RIPE NCC 
procedural document, etc.

So - bonus for the community at large but a bit of a bummer for us in 
getting this in place for RIPE 79.

Brian, I'm with you on the IA being done on 3.0...would seem weird to 
ask the NCC to do an IA on 2.0 when we have an improved, better 3.0 
version that has taken into consideration the input from the community.

So - next steps are to reach out to HPH for the way forward here and 
report back to the list on the outcomes.

Many thanks,

Amanda

On 04/10/2019 11:19, Rob Evans wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> What do other people think?
> I’m not really surprised.  Other non-policy documents have gone through the largely the same procedure.  I suppose a heads-up would have been useful, but this could just be a mismatch of expectations — those in the NCC expect us to be using the PDP, we thought this was a parallel activity.
>
> When the only hammer you have is the PDP, every document looks like a policy. :-)
>
> I suspect getting consensus on v3 and getting the IA on that is the most likely way forward, in my limited understanding anyway.
>
> Cheers,
> Rob
>