Hi Jordi,

> [Jordi] I think we are in-sync, but your response clearly demonstrates that 
> there is a need for clarifying the text.
> -> Policy proposal “Providing another entity with separate addresses (not 
> prefixes)”
> -> a /64 is a prefix

Technically, because the router is the PI holder's, you're not delegating a 
/64. You're allowing a customer to do i.e. SLAAC on a /64 of the PI holder. And 
Max is correct: when in doubt the RIPE NCC will check the rationale behind a 
policy proposal to make decisions, and they have clearly and explicitly stated 
that this is how they will interpret and implement it. Therefore there is no 
discrepancy between the text and the impact.

> The text is not concrete enough so to be enforced in the evaluation (again, 
> unless the NCC read the arguments and not the policy text).

The NCC reads both. This has explicitly been discussed before, and both the NCC 
and the working group confirmed that we don't want policy text that is too 
specific because reality is more complex than policy, and if we would try to 
make the policy complexity match that of reality then we would end up with 
horrible policy. The community has agreed not to micro-manage the NCC, and the 
NCC has promised to apply common sense when implementing policy. We also have a 
dedicated slot in the working group session where the NCC gives feedback on how 
things are going, where they have encountered any issues and where reality has 
changed so much that maybe the working group might want to look into changing 
policy.

There have been many cycles of micromanaging the NCC to writing vague policy 
and letting the NCC sort out the details. In both cases the NCC was blamed for 
everything. After many years of hard work we have reached a balance where the 
working group and the NCC work together to make policy that is one the one hand 
giving guidance to the NCC about what the community wants, but also leaves some 
room for the NCC (along with the accompanying responsibility) to adapt to 
changes and to apply some common sense.

Other organisations in the internet constellation have moved to a more legalese 
mindset, but I think as the RIPE community we are proud that we have evolved 
enough that we don't need that anymore and can actually work together 
pleasantly without setting everything in stone.

Cheers,
Sander


Reply via email to