Updates to RIPE-500: Policy Development in RIPE

Hello,

As far as I can read from the document, some proposals can enter the system directly through Discussion Phase, without any prior discussion in the WG. In those cases length of the Discussion Phase will be decided by the Chairs of the WG that the proposal was submitted to and accepted in, I assume. 

I think it will be good practice to make it clear who makes these decisions.  
Transparency through clear documentation helps processes.

Filiz 

 
On 08 May 2014, at 17:20, Jim Reid <jim at rfc1035.com> wrote:

> On 8 May 2014, at 15:46, Leo Vegoda <leo.vegoda at icann.org> wrote:
> 
>> As "proposals" aren't people I am not sure whether the decision to change
>> the timeline sits with the proposer, the WG chair, or someone else.
> 
> Leo, like pretty much everything else in RIPE, this should be a consensus decision by the relevant WG(s). The WG chair should be responsible for making that happen.
> 
> I would have hoped it was not necessary to document this. IMO, RIPE needs to keep process and "rules" to the absolute minimum.
> 
> 
>