[rpd] New Policy Proposal Received - "AFRINIC Policy Development Process Bis (AFPUB-2017-GEN-002-DRAFT-01)

[Dewole Ajao]

Good day AFRINIC PDWG Members,

We have received a new policy Proposal - "AFRINIC Policy Development 
Process Bis (AFPUB-2017-GEN-002-DRAFT-01)"

 From the following authors:
(a) Komi Abel Elitcha | kmw.elitcha at gmail.com | Independent
(b) Arnaud A. A. AMELINA | amelnaud at gmail.com | TogoRER
(c) Honest Ornella GANKPA | honest1989 at gmail.com | Independent
(d) Alain P. AINA  | Alain.Aina at wacren.net | WACREN

The proposal contents are below and published at 
https://afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development/policy-proposals/2083-afrinic-policy-development-process-bis

Please take some time to go through the proposal contents and provide 
your feedback.

Thank you.

PDWG Co-chairs

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————
ID: AFPUB-2017-GEN-002-DRAFT-01
Submission Date: 27 April 2017
Version: 1
Author(s):
Komi Abel Elitcha | kmw.elitcha at gmail.com | Independent
Arnaud A. A. AMELINA | amelnaud at gmail.com | TogoRER
Honest Ornella GANKPA | honest1989 at gmail.com | Independent
Alain P. AINA  | Alain.Aina at wacren.net | WACREN
Amends: Art. 3.0 of the Consolidated Policy Manual
——————————————————————————————————————————————————————

1.0 Summary of the Problem Being Addressed by this Policy Proposal
The current Policy Development Process is shaped around a working group, 
which is administered by two Chairs.

The working group operations rules are not clearly defined as for:
* Requirements for chairmanship
* Chairs roles and responsibilities
* How Chairs exercise their powers
* Chairs election
* Chairs resignation
* Working group code of conduct

The consensus process used by the working group for decision-making is 
not defined, opening doors for interpretations and inactions.

The current process does not have provision for proposal adoption, which 
induces duplication of proposals dealing with same problem, lack of 
clarity of problem statements and proposals out of scope of the PDP. It 
also does not define a clear method for moving proposals forward.

The current PDP does not have provision for board adopting policies as 
per section 11.4 of the AFRINIC constitution in the varying of the process.

2.0 Summary of How this Proposal Addresses the Problem
This Policy proposal addresses these issues by:
Designing a policy development process around one Chair assisted by a 
Vice-Chair;
Defining the roles and responsibilities of the Chair and Vice-Chair;
Defining how Chair exercises his authority and powers;
Detailing the consensus process with regard to major and minor 
objections and responsibility of the Chair of the working group in 
gauging the consensus;
Providing with different phases for policy proposals:  from adoption 
till last call and ratification by the AFRINIC board of Directors;
Providing provision on how board adopts policy as per section 11.4 of 
the constitution that is managed in varying the PDP.
Clarifying disputes and appeals mechanisms

3.0 Proposal
This proposal replaces section 3.0 of the CPM (The Policy Development 
Process) entirely as follows:

3.0 The Policy Development Process
3.1 Scope
The Policy Development Process covers the development and modification 
of policies for proper and responsible usage and management of Internet 
Number Resources within the AFRINIC service region.
The PDP is shaped to come up with clear, technically effective and 
useful policies.
Policies for Internet number resource management must be evaluated for 
technical effectiveness against three requirements: conservation, 
aggregation, and registration.
Changes to the Policy Development Process itself will also follow the 
process.
Internet number resource policies are distinctly separate from AFRINIC 
general business practices and procedures. General business practices 
and procedures are not within the purview of the Policy Development Process.
Internet number resources consist of Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) 
address space, Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) address space, and 
Autonomous System (AS) numbers.

3.2 Policy Development Principles
All policies are developed by the Internet community following four 
principles: openness, transparency, fairness and bottom-up. The Internet 
community initiates and discusses the policy proposals. If consensus is 
reached on a given policy proposal, it is recommended to the AFRINIC 
Board of Directors to be ratified as an effective policy to be 
implemented within AFRINIC region.

3.2.1 Openness
All policies are developed in an open forum in which anyone may 
participate. There are no qualifications for participation.

3.2.2 Transparency
All aspects of the Policy Development Process are documented and 
publicly available via the AFRINIC website. The discussions are publicly 
archived. All procedures that are developed to implement the policy are 
documented by AFRINIC and are publicly available.

3.2.3 Fairness
The policies are to ensure fair distribution of Internet number 
resources and facilitate the operation of the Internet within AFRINIC 
Service Region.

3.2.4 Bottom-Up
The community drives policy development.

3.3 Operations of the Policy Development Working Group (PDWG)
The Policy Development Working group (PDWG) provides an open public 
forum to discuss Internet numbers resource management policies and 
related topics of interest to AFRINIC and the Internet community in the 
AFRINIC service region. PDWG sessions are held at AFRINIC Public policy 
meetings. Between meetings, discussions continue via the Resource Policy 
Discussions (rpd) mailing list. The PDWG is open to all interested 
individuals.
The Policy Development Working Group is primarily administered by one 
Chair and one vice-Chair. The WG Chair and Vice-Chair perform a vital 
role in managing the working group. The effectiveness of the PDWG is 
dependent on the active participation of the Chair and the Vice-Chair. 
The PDWG Chair and Vice-Chair undertake their work on a volunteer basis.
The PDWG Chair is responsible for coordinating the activities of the 
policy development working group. He guides a policy proposal through 
its different phases in order to gauge consensus.
The Vice-Chair helps the WG Chair to coordinate the activities of the 
policy development working group.
The WG Chair and Vice-Chair are expected to attend all AFRINIC Public 
Policy Meetings. The WG Chair and Vice-Chair must remain subscribed to 
the AFRINIC Policy Discussion mailing list( rpd at afrinic.net) for the 
duration of their term. Both the PDWG Chair and Vice-Chair must also be 
subscribed to the AFRINIC member-discuss mailing list during their term.
The challenge of managing the policy development working group sessions 
is to balance the need for open and fair consideration of the issues 
against the need to make forward progress.  The working group, as a 
whole, has the final responsibility for striking this balance. The 
Working Group Chair has the responsibility for overseeing the process.
To facilitate making forward progress, the Working Group Chair may wish 
to decide to reject or defer the input from an individual, based upon 
the following criteria:

Old:
The input pertains to a topic that already has been resolved and is 
redundant with information previously available;

Minor:
The input is new and pertains to a topic that has already been resolved, 
but it is felt to be of minor import to the existing decision;

Timing:
The input pertains to a topic that the working group has not yet opened 
for discussion;

Scope:
The input is outside of the scope of the working group.
Occasionally one or more individuals may engage in behavior on a mailing 
list that, in the opinion of the WG Chair, is disruptive to the WG 
process. Unless the disruptive behavior is severe enough that it must be 
stopped immediately, the WG Chair should attempt to discourage the 
disruptive behavior by communicating directly with the offending 
individual. If the behavior persists, the WG Chair should send at least 
one public warning on the RPD mailing list. As a last resort and 
typically after one or more explicit warnings, the WG Chair may suspend 
the mailing list posting privileges of the disruptive individual for a 
period of not more than 30 days. Even while posting privileges are 
suspended, the individual must not be prevented from receiving messages 
posted to the list. Like all other WG Chair decisions, any suspension of 
posting privileges is subject to appeal.

3.3.1 Responsibilities of PDWG Chair
The responsibilities of the AFRINIC PDWG Chair are listed below:

3.3.1.1 Before an AFRINIC Public Policy Meeting:
Introduce a policy proposal into the adoption phase
Announce policy proposals to the policy discussion mailing list
Discourages any behavior that jeopardizes open participation to policy 
discussions, especially for newcomers.
Monitors discussions held on AFRINIC policy discussion mailing list ( 
rpd at afrinic.net)
Announces the call for presentation of policy proposals for Public 
Policy Meetings on the policy discussion mailing list,
Read submitted proposals
Remain subscribed to AFRINIC RPD and member-discuss lists during his term.
At the AFRINIC Public Policy Meeting
Read initiators' slides to familiarize themselves with the details and 
ensure it matches proposal text. In case of any difference, submission 
of an updated version of the proposal on rpd list to notify the working 
group is required, even if these changes will not be considered.
Create agenda presentation slides for the meeting with the AFRINIC staff.
Guide the consensus gauging process; announces the current phase of a 
policy proposal.
Read AFRINIC Public Policy Meeting minutes and makes corrections as 
necessary
Present the policy discussion working group report to the AFRINIC Public 
Policy Meeting.

3.3.1.2 After a Public Policy Meeting:
Send report of Public Policy Meeting to the community and policy 
discussion mailing lists including policy proposal discussion outcomes 
and open action items.
Monitor discussion during the concluding phase for comments period.
Summarize discussions and, following the end of the call for comments, 
post the decision regarding whether the proposal has reached rough 
consensus or not.
The Chair may delegate tasks to Vice-Chair as necessary.

3.3.2 Responsibilities of PDWG Vice-Chair
Vice-Chair responsibilities include but are not limited to:
Attend at least one AFRINIC Public Policy Meeting held each year.
Remain subscribed to the policy discussion mailing list for the duration 
of their time as Vice-Chair
Monitor remote chat-room discussions during the AFRINIC Public Policy 
Meeting
Undertake any of the tasks normally performed by the PDWG Chair when 
requested. In the event that the PDWG Chair is unavailable to perform 
some of his duties, the Vice-Chair will assume these responsibilities.

3.3.3 Electing the Chair and Vice-Chair
The AFRINIC community elects a policy development working group Chair 
and one Vice-Chair for a two year term. The PDWG Chair and Vice-Chair’s 
elections occur in alternate years.
The AFRINIC NomCom appoints the PDWG Chair and Vice-Chair using the 
following process:
AFRINIC Staff sends a call for nominations to the policy development 
mailing list ( rpd at afrinic.net). The call will contain:
Details of the duties of the position.
The closing date for nominations; 30 days from the date of the call
A request for a short biography and description of nominees.
A requirement that candidates for the Chair position should be active on 
the AFRINIC policy mailing list and must have attended at least two (2) 
AFRINIC Public Policy Meetings,
A requirement for candidates to confirm their ability and willingness to 
commit to the responsibilities associated with the Chair and Vice-Chair 
positions.
If at least one nomination is received by closing date, an election must 
be held. The election must be held at the upcoming Public Policy Meeting 
as the first item on the agenda.
Candidates will be invited to give a short speech. Voting will take 
place by a count of a show of hands.
Only candidates who are present at the public policy meeting will be 
included in the vote. If a current Vice-Chair stands for the position of 
Chair and is elected, the newly vacant Vice-Chair position can be filled 
by one of the remaining candidates for the Chair position or by a call 
for volunteers at the public policy meeting.
There will be a handover period. The outgoing Chair will manage 
proposals reaching consensus at the current Public Policy meeting to the 
completion of the Policy Development Process.

3.3.4 Removing a PDWG Chair or Vice-Chair
If the PDWG Chair or Vice-Chair does not attend one in every two 
consecutive AFRINIC Public Policy Meeting, the Chair or Vice-Chair will 
be removed from their role. The process of electing a replacement will 
then begin.
Anyone may request the recall of a Working Group Chair at any time, upon 
written request with justification to the AFRINIC Board of Directors. 
The request must be supported by at least ten (10) other persons. The 
AFRINIC Board of Directors shall appoint a recall committee, excluding 
the persons requesting the recall and the Working Group Chair. The 
recall committee shall investigate the circumstances of the request for 
the recall and determine the outcome.
If the outcome is that the WG Chair or Vice-Chair has to be recalled 
then the process of electing a replacement will then begin.

3.3.5 Resignation of a Chair or Vice-Chair
If a PDWG Chair resigns, the vice-Chair will assume the role of Chair 
and nominate a member of the community to exercise the role of 
Vice-Chair until the next Public Policy Meeting. This nomination has to 
be approved through non-objection by the working group via the mailing 
list. At least 30 days prior to the Public Policy Meeting, the AFRINIC 
NomCom will initiate procedures for electing the new Chair.
If a Vice-Chair resigns, the Chair shall nominate a member of the 
community to exercise the role of Vice-Chair until the next Public 
Policy Meeting. This nomination has to be approved through non-objection 
by the working group via the mailing list. At least one month prior to 
the Public Policy Meeting, the AFRINIC NomCom will initiate procedures 
for electing the new Chair.
If both Chair and vice Chair resign, The AFRINIC Ltd CEO shall lead the 
appointment by the working group of an interim Chair via the mailing 
list or at The Public Policy meeting.
The Interim Chair will act up to the election of the new Chair and shall 
be assisted by AFRINIC staff.

4.0 Consensus inside the PDWG
Most of the decisions in the working group operations and discussions on 
policy proposals are made through rough consensus, unless specified 
otherwise.
The PDWG consensus process is a multi-stakeholder approach to 
decision-making. The process is used to develop the best possible 
resource management policies for the AFRINIC service region.
The consensus process begins when somebody proposes a new policy.
This discussion phase begins on the mailing list and continues during 
the Public policy meetings.

4.1 Minor objections
A minor objection is one where the objector believes some problems may 
occur for some participants in the group if the proposal goes forward.
The PDWG participants should work together to see if the proposal can be 
modified to overcome minor objections.
However, it is not always possible to overcome these objections. In this 
case, the Chair may ask the objectors if they are prepared to 
acknowledge that the overall advantages of the proposal outweigh their 
objections and are willing to set them aside.

4.2 Major objections
Major objections are serious and indicate a belief that major problems 
will occur for parts of the community if the proposal goes forward; 
therefore, the proposal cannot be adopted in its current format.
The Chair should devote sufficient time for the PDWG to discuss ways to 
overcome major objections.
PDWG Participants, including the proponent, should work together to 
develop solutions that overcome major objections.
Consensus is reached on a proposal if the PDWG is able to successfully 
work through all objections in this way. It is not necessary for 
everyone to agree with the proposal. ‘Rough consensus’ is the point 
where all objections have been resolved or given due consideration and 
the PDWG believes the benefits outweigh the disadvantages.

4.3 Reaching consensus
In the meeting the Chair may ask for a show-of-hands, or other 
techniques, to gauge support for a policy proposal. The use of 
show-of-hands or other techniques is not a vote. It is a way of broadly 
measuring opinion and the Chair’s final decision takes many additional 
factors into account, including earlier discussions on the mailing list.
The aim of the PDWG is to carefully consider all opinions before making 
a decision. At the end of the discussion, the Chair will decide if the 
working group has reached consensus.
Consensus is achieved when everyone consents to the decision of the 
group. The decision may not be everyone’s first preference, but is 
acceptable to all participants.

5.0 Public Policy Meeting
Public Policy Meeting means a meeting open to the community wherein 
proposals for policies are discussed within the framework of the Policy 
Development Process (PDP)
The agenda of the meeting shall be announced by the Chair of the PDWG on 
the Resource Policy Discussion mailing list at least two weeks prior to 
the meeting. No change can be made to a policy proposal within one week 
of the meeting. This is so that a stable version of the policy proposal 
can be considered at the meeting.
The WG Chair determines whether rough consensus has been achieved during 
the Public Policy Meeting.
When a policy proposal has reached the Review Phase, it is placed on the 
agenda of an open public policy meeting.
If the Chair can’t participate in meeting, the Vice-Chair will lead the 
meeting assisted by AFRINIC staff.
If the Vice-Chair can’t participate in meeting, the Chair will lead the 
meeting assisted by AFRINIC staff.
If WG Chair and Vice-Chair can’t participate to meetings, the working 
group shall appoint one (1) person to lead the session and is assisted 
by one AFRINIC staff.
While open discussion and contribution is essential to working group 
success, the Chair is responsible for ensuring forward progress. When 
acceptable to the WG, the Chair may call for restricted participation 
(but not restricted attendance!) at Public Policy meetings for the 
purpose of achieving progress. The Working Group Chair then has the 
responsibility to refuse to grant the floor to any individual who is 
unprepared or otherwise covering inappropriate material, or who, in the 
opinion of the Chair is disrupting the WG process.

6.0 Policy proposals
Anyone can submit a policy proposal to PDWG Chair. One or all initiators 
of a policy proposal have the option to remain anonymous. Hence PDWG 
Chair has the responsibility to act as document editor or set a call for 
a volunteer from the WG to act as document editor on the policy proposal.
A Document Editor is responsible for ensuring that the contents of the 
document accurately reflect the decisions that have been made by the 
working group.

6.1 Phases of a policy proposal
A policy proposal follows four phases during its evolution through 
policy development process: Adoption Phase, Discussion Phase, Review 
Phase and the Concluding Phase.

6.1.1 The Adoption Phase
During this phase, the PDWG Chair will assess the clarity and the 
relevance of the problem statement in accordance to the scope of the PDP 
and the existing policies.
PDWG Chair or AFRINIC staff can work with the initiator(s) to redefine 
the problem statement if need be.
For policy proposals which are out of scope of AFRINIC PDP, or 
addressing the same issue as another policy proposal already adopted, 
the PDWG Chair shall dissuade the initiator(s) from submitting to the 
working group.
In case of disagreement or doubt the PDWG Chair may consult the working 
group on whether or not the working group is willing to adopt the 
proposal for discussion based on its problem statement.
Once adopted by the working group, the initiator(s) grants all rights to 
the working group and the proposal becomes a community document.
In all matters of intellectual property rights and procedures, the 
intention is to benefit the community and the public at large, while 
respecting the legitimate rights of others.
The adoption phase should last maximum of two weeks. At the term of two 
weeks, based on consensus, PDWG Chair declares the beginning of the 
Discussion phase or declares the rejection of the policy proposal.
The initiator(s) of the policy proposal can reformulate their problem 
statement and go back to the adoption phase.

6.1.2 The Discussion Phase
Once the PDWG Chair declares the adoption of a policy proposal for 
discussion, the Discussion Phase begins on the RPD Mailing List ( 
rpd at afrinic.net). The PDWG Chair should set the period for the 
Discussion Phase and this must be for at least four weeks.
During the discussion phase, the working group evaluates the policy 
proposal and comments are made. Politeness and courtesy must lead 
discussions, PDWG Chair should emphasize this each time it is relevant.
At the end of the Discussion Phase, the PDWG Chair provides a summary of 
the discussion highlighting the close and open issues.
Once the working group agrees on the summary, which can be edited 
according to feedbacks, the PDWG Chair decides whether the policy 
proposal should move to the next phase (Review Phase), go to an extended 
discussion phase or should be withdrawn. The decision to move forward 
will be announced on RPD mailing list.
If significant comments or modifications are suggested during the 
Discussion Phase, the policy proposal initiators will review the 
proposal and a new version will be published. A new Discussion Phase 
will then start for the new version of the proposal. This new Discussion 
Phase should last at least two weeks.
If the suggested comments or modifications are not so significant to 
require a new Discussion Phase, the PDWG Chair can decide to move the 
proposal to the next phase (Review Phase) with a new version of the 
proposal incorporating the necessary changes.
Each version of the proposal is publicly archived to transparently show 
the history of changes to the proposal and published on AFRINIC web site.
The new version of the policy proposal should be announced on AFRINIC 
RPD mailing list and website before the proposal can be moved to the 
Review Phase.
The PDWG Chair shall request the AFRINIC Ltd CEO to conduct and publish 
an impact analysis about the proposal before it can be moved to the 
Review Phase. The goal of this analysis is to provide relevant 
supporting information to facilitate the discussions about the proposal 
and provide some projections about the possible impact if it were to be 
accepted. This analysis will contain the following points:
AFRINIC Ltd’s understanding of the proposed policy
Impact on the registry and Internet Number Resources
Impact on AFRINIC Ltd’s operations/services
Legal impact

6.1.3 The Review Phase
The goal of this phase is to review the full draft policy proposal 
compiled at the end of the Discussion Phase. Hence, the final 
documentation of the proposal will lead to rough consensus; all 
modifications made to that document should be transparent to the working 
group. During the Review Phase, discussion of the draft proposal can 
continue, also in the light of the impact analysis, and within the 
context of the proposal, further modifications can still be suggested 
regarding the draft proposal. The Review Phase should last for a maximum 
of four weeks.
At the end of the Review Phase, the PDWG Chair determines whether the 
working group has reached rough consensus. In the case the PDWG Chair 
decides that consensus has not been reached, then the PDWG Chair can 
send the draft proposal back to the Discussion Phase if the initiators 
are willing to make an improvement of their proposal and make the 
necessary changes according to the feedback received from the community.
A draft proposal sent back to discussion phase automatically lost its 
status of draft proposal.
The PDWG Chair can also decide to have the draft proposal edited and 
start a new Review Phase with a new version of the proposal or otherwise 
the proposal shall be withdrawn.

6.1.4 The Concluding Phase
In the case, the Chair determines that the WG has reached consensus at 
the end of the Review Phase, the PDWG Chair moves the draft proposal to 
a "Last Call for Comments" and the Concluding Phase starts. The Last 
Call period lasts at least two weeks. The Last Call shall be announced 
on policy discussions mailing list.
The purpose of this Last Call period is to provide the community with a 
final opportunity to comment on the draft proposal. This is especially 
intended for those who missed the previous two phases and want to oppose 
the proposal or make substantial remark. The "Last Call for Comments" 
gives time to the community after the PDWG Chair declares rough 
consensus at the end of the Review Phase so that suggestions for any 
final changes or objections to the proposal can be sent to the WG 
mailing list. At this stage, objections need to be justified just as in 
the other phases for them to be taken into account.
At the end of the Last Call period, the PDWG Chair will assess the 
feedback received during this period and decide whether consensus has 
been achieved. If there is no feedback from the community at this stage, 
this is regarded as consensus.
If rough consensus is achieved, the PDWG Chair will announce the 
decision and initiate the process of the draft proposal ratification by 
AFRINIC board of directors.
If consensus has not been achieved, the PDWG Chair can decide to either 
send back the proposal to the previous phases of Discussion or Review, 
otherwise the proposal shall be withdrawn.
The initiators of a policy proposal (or anyone else) are free to return 
the proposal to the RPD mailing list for further discussion after a 
withdrawal.

6.2 Policy Ratification
After a draft proposal has reached rough consensus, AFRINIC board of 
Directors have the obligation to check if process have been followed 
very well.
In the case of a rejection, the AFRINIC board of directors must justify 
and publish the reason on the resources policy discussion list ( 
rpd at afrinic.net) and on the AFRINIC website, and ask the working group 
to rectify the issue.
After ratification, AFRINIC board of Directors, announce their decision 
to the working group and this activates implementation of the policy by 
AFRINIC staff.

7.0 Appeals
7.1 Appealable Actions
7.1.1 Suspension of posting privileges
Anyone whose privileges of posting to the Resources Policy Discussion 
mailing list have been suspended by the WG Chair may file an appeal 
against the decision to the AFRINIC board of directors. The board shall 
investigate the circumstances of the justification as prescribed and 
determine the outcome.

7.1.2 During the Discussion Phase
During the Discussion Phase, anyone who has a complaint or other concern 
about the policy proposal or how it is being handled on the policy 
development mailing list should first raise the matter with the PDWG 
Chair. If the dispute cannot be resolved with the PDWG Chair, the 
appeals Procedure can be invoked.

7.1.3 During the Review & Concluding Phases
At these stages of the process – i.e. after the PDWG Chair has declared 
initial consensus or the proposal is in Last Call – complaints should 
not be about the policy proposal itself unless there are exceptional 
extenuating circumstances.
Anyone who believes that the proposal has not been handled correctly or 
that the PDWG Chair has made an incorrect determination of consensus 
should first raise the matter with the PDWG Chair. If the dispute cannot 
be resolved with the WG Chair, the Appeals Procedure can be invoked.

7.2 Appeals procedure
An appeal can only be filed if it is supported by three (3) individuals 
from the Working Group who have participated in the discussions to an 
Appeal committee appointed by the AFRINIC Board of Directors. The appeal 
must be submitted within two weeks of the public knowledge of the 
decision. The Appeal Committee shall issue a report on its review of the 
complaint to the Working Group. The Appeal Committee may direct that the 
Chair decision be annulled if the Policy Development Process has not 
been followed.

8.0 Varying the Process
8.1 Variance by the PDWG
The process outlined in this document may vary in the case of an 
emergency. Variance is for use when a one-time waiving of some provision 
of this document is required. The decision to vary the process is taken 
by the Working Group Chair. There must be an explanation about why the 
variance is needed. The discussion, review and concluding period shall 
not be less than four weeks. If there is consensus, the policy is 
approved and it must be presented at the next Public Policy Meeting.

8.2 Variance by the AFRINIC board of Directors
As per section 11.4 of the AFRINIC constitution, AFRINIC board of 
Directors may adopt policies regarding the management of Internet number 
resources where it considers that the same is necessary and urgent, 
having regard to the proper and responsible usage of these resources.
The decision to vary the process is presented to the Working Group. 
There must be an explanation about why the variance is needed. The Board 
of Directors shall allow the working group to review the proposal for a 
period of not less than two weeks.
While the board of Directors is encouraged to take into consideration 
the comments and suggestions from this review, these comments and 
suggestions are not binding.
The working group at the following public policy meeting will endorse 
any such adopted policy as per section 11.5 of the bylaws,

4.0 Revision History

Date    Revision
28 April 2017    Version 1 posted to rpd


5.0 References

This proposal is mainly based on the intensive discussions we had on the 
current PDP during 2016 and 2017 on the RPD mailing list. It addresses 
issues by referring to best practices from the IETF and the PDPs of 
other RIRs.