[ripe-list] repeated and continued PDP violation - WG chairs delaying or denying proposal publication - new policy proposal "Ensure Neutrality of PDP Appeals Procedure"

For many years ago, at lease since I did my first policy proposal (around 2003 or so I think), in most of the RIRs, the staff provides an initial feedback, editorial suggestions, sometimes they verify if something can really be done or not, possible issues, suggestions, etc., etc.

I think this is good and perfectly acceptable *if* it is not "mandatory" for the authors to take it.

Same for the chairs (very few actually), they provide inputs, suggestions, etc., etc., etc., but can't enforce the authors about those.

I believe this is especially important because having more eyes and native English speakers (in 4 of the 5 RIRs) reading the proposal before the formal publication, can save a lot of discussion time and avoid miss-interpretations (because language or wording).

I'm talking from my own experience: I've not really counted how many policy proposals I've submitted among all the RIRs, but probably close or slightly exceeding 100 and I think about 95% have succeeded to reach consensus (not counting those that are still in discussion or equivalent phases - may be around 15 at the time being). I think it is a good "sampling" of how the process works.

If other authors have a different experience, it will be good to know.

Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 8/2/21 14:38, "Jim Reid" <jim at rfc1035.com> escribió:



    > On 7 Feb 2021, at 21:56, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ripe-list <ripe-list at ripe.net> wrote:
    > 
    > I proposed several choices in my first versions (Arbiters, then Board), but the staff suggested against ... 

    So, the NCC staff are making policy now? Interesting.




**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.