Re: [sig-policy] prop-103-v001: A Final IP Address Policy Proposal
Your own interpretations may vary, but that hints at 2 possibilities to me.
1) People in AU are apathetic if the policy either passes or does not. Which may well support Randy's position that there isn't anything left (policy wise) to get enthusiastic about.
2) People in AU (generally) are well removed from policy and provided as they have a direction forward to keeping their networks running, then they will just get on with it as their business directs.
T.
On 12/07/2012, at 7:34 AM, Dean Pemberton wrote:
> After consultation with people within the NZ community both online and in person at the current Nethui event, there is not a lot of support for the proposal in its current form.
>
> What there is however, is an acknowledgement that there may be a change required in the PDP process, and a willingness to engage to discuss such changes.
>
> Randy, would you as the proposer be open to making amendments to this proposal? Or would you rather that it stand as currently written?
>
> Regards
> Dean
>
> On Monday, July 9, 2012, Dean Pemberton wrote:
> I agree with Owen here.
> If this is really something that Randy wants to bring to the table,
> then I believe that the chairs have made the correct decision bringing
> it to the list.
>
> I will socialise the proposal around the New Zealand community and
> bring that and my own commentary back to the list.
>
>
> Regards,
> Dean
>
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong dot com> wrote:
> > Andy,
> >
> > I think the chairs made the correct decision in posting this to the list.
> >
> > While I believe that the policy is without merit and would actually be quite harmful, if adopted, I believe it is within scope of the PDP and that the community and not the chairs alone should make that determination. I can certainly understand the difficulty in determining whether to take such a proposal seriously, as my initial reaction was to see if I'd lost track of time and it was already April 1 again. However, I think erring on the side of assuming the proposer is serious and allowing the community to discuss it just in case is the right thing to do.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Owen
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Dean
>
> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy