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

[rpd] Statement from the authors of Soft Landing Overhall (AFPUB-2016-V4-002-DRAFT01)

Noah noah at
Mon Dec 12 18:38:56 UTC 2016

On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Alston <
Andrew.Alston at> wrote:

> Hi Noah,
> The issue here is that to work together requires mutual trust and a
> willingness to work together.  That requires an action of good faith on
> both sides.

We are yet to here from the other side however, the minutes of the pdp
meeting shared by the co-chairs speak for themselves.

> At the initial point of authorship of both policies, both policies were
> proposals before consultation with the wider community, we wish to reverse
> that now, and see if we can get the understandings first, and see if it is
> possible to bring them all together and THEN draft from a point of view of
> consensus.

Is there any policy that has ever been proposed through consultation of the
wider community.  Last I checked, all the policies were and are proposed by
individuals without a wider consultation from the wider community and the
community only comes in after the authors have submitted their proposal. It
has always been the norm.

*This approach you propose intends to cause unnecessary stalemate similar
to the situations where folk decide to come up with counter policies
against other policy proposals **as a way of disagreement  thereby** confusing
and wasting the communities time which is counter-productive hence the
current deadlock. *

Now, according to you, (and email from co-chairs ref: pdp minutes [1])
soft-landing overhaul team agreed and decided to withdraw their policy as
per community request which you did.

[1]. Soft Landing Overhaul
No consensus to proceed; Return to rpd mailing list for further discussion.
(Authors subsequently withdrew proposal to be able to cooperate with
authors of directly opposing proposal for IPv4 runout management)

According to earlier emails from the co-chairs [2], the authors of
soft-landing bis never accepted to withdraw their policy and even from the
video achieve i see the same. As such their policy is back to the mailing
list as confirmed by the Adewole and co-chairs of the pdp.

[2]  IPv4 Soft Landing - BIS
No consensus to proceed; Return to rpd mailing list for further discussion.

Now based on the above. How about we expand and improve soft-landing bis.

> Thanks
> Andrew


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list