Hi Kurt,
Agree, but as I mention yesterday, the thing is that I’ve seen several times in RIPE, decisions not really following the rough consensus definition. I’m not saying, not at all, that it is easy, but summaries of the discussion (not the conclusion) help to advance, decide better a possible way forward, or even stop. Rough consensus can’t be based on “I don’t like this” “there is strong opposition”, unless technically justified what is broken by the proposal. If the proposal doesn’t break anything, even if is only going to help to something in a 1% it is good for the overall community, so objections are invalid. To be clear, this text is generic, not thinking in the actual discussion/proposal. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 9/7/20 16:43, "Kurt Kayser" <[email protected]> escribió: Hello Jordi, in one way I agree with you, but seeing the history on this topic why not run some type of quick poll to check if people see value to continue on it or not: A: This proposal should be dropped (confirm the chair's intention) B: There is a good intention behind the proposal, but no progress for the content - (stalled?) - are there volunteers to continue on it (if yes, please stand up) C: Abstain to voice no opinion - but counts as active participant Something like this that it helps the chair to make the right choice. Regards, Kurt Am 09.07.20 um 16:26 schrieb JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via routing-wg: Nobody said the same proposal. That's part of the reason a summary of the points is important. I still believe it makes more sense the extend the discussion. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 9/7/20 16:21, "routing-wg en nombre de Gert Doering" <[email protected] en nombre de [email protected]> escribió: Hi, On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 04:18:35PM +0200, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via routing-wg wrote: > 2) sending a new proposal > 2 is easier and faster probably. It is not a flooding, is a single proposal. According the PDP there is no way the chairs can reject a proposal. Repeating the same proposal ad nauseam in the hope that it gets more traction the second time, or that people will tire of repeating their counterarguments again and again is misuse of the PDP. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 ********************************************** 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. ********************************************** 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.
