Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

Discarding Dead Global Policies [Was Re: [AfriNIC-rpd] Discarding dead policies]

Owen DeLong owen at
Wed May 23 06:04:38 UTC 2012

Forgive my ignorance.

Shouldn't this be as simple as:

1.	The PDWG co-chairs send a message to rpd mailing list stating that they believe
	the policy is dead and would like to abandon it at the next RPD face-to-face meeding.

2.	If there is objection on the RPD list, it should be considered.

3.	If there is objection at the meeting, it should be considered.

4.	If there is no objection at the meeting and none on the list, the co-chairs should
	declare consensus that the proposal is dead and the policy should be removed.

	If there are objections, but, the co-chairs feel that the objections were adequately
	addressed and there is consensus that the proposal is, indeed dead, then they
	should declare consensus and the policy should be removed.

	Otherwise, the policy should remain and the co-chairs should solicit community
	input as to what to do with it next.

Am I missing something? It seems to me that the list has spent far more time discussing
how to deal with an obviously dead policy than it should take to simply deal with it.

I believe the above process adequately safeguards against "tyrannical chairs" silently
disposing of policy proposals that the community wants to keep alive. That is, to the
best of my knowledge, the only concern that needs to prevent such an action from


More information about the RPD mailing list