Hi Nick, I participate on IETF, and I know RFC7282, however I fail to see in our PDP that we are bound to that RFC?
I also just read again the PDP, and my understanding is that we are doing something different than what the process say, following https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-642 I don’t see how a policy proposal that at the end of the review phase (maximum 4 weeks), has not reached consensus, as the only alternative is a “new” review phase, with a new version of the proposal: >From the PDP: “The WG chair can also decide to have the draft RIPE Document edited and start a new Review Phase with a new version of the proposal.” Regards, Jordi -----Mensaje original----- De: address-policy-wg <[email protected]> en nombre de Nick Hilliard <[email protected]> Fecha: lunes, 15 de enero de 2018, 12:17 Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email protected]> CC: <[email protected]> Asunto: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2016-04 To Last Call (IPv6 Sub-assignment Clarification) JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg wrote: > Obviously, I don’t agree, just because for me, “consensus” is having > no objections, not a “democracy voting”. APWG aims to follow the IETF approach to consensus, as defined in rfc7282. This explicitly allows for consensus to be declared even if there are outstanding objections. Nick ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.consulintel.es 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.
