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

[rpd] Last Call for "AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT-04 - Internet Number Resources Review by AFRINIC"

ALI Hadji Mmadi alihadji90 at
Thu Jul 20 07:15:44 UTC 2017

Hi Alan,
I agree with you, and I think it is a message of wisdom and responsibility.
But,In the one of discussion of a policy, you said publicly that  if there
was a consensus, you would advise the board not to ratify it.
So, If the consesus was get in this polcy, what will be your opinion to the
Ali of Comoros.

2017-07-19 8:28 GMT+03:00 Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at>:

> > On 18 Jul 2017, at 22:10, Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at> wrote:
> > There is a full consensus on the list on the principle of review
> (including yourself).
> >
> > What Is then expected from all participants in the PDP is to contribute
> to improve the proposal on the table to make it a consensual document.
> A policy proposal, to be accepted, must gain rough consensus on the detils
> of the proposal, not only on the principle.
> When a proposal fails to find rough consensus, then I believe that the
> onus is on the authors to  produce a revised draft that addresses the
> objections, or to persuade the community as a whole that the objections are
> not valid or not important.  Alternatively, the authors may withdraw the
> proposal.
> Objectors who want to be taken seriously should explain the reasons for
> their objections.  There is no requirement for objectors to suggest
> alternative text to improve the proposal, although it is often very useful
> for objectors to do that.  Authors can use these explanations, and proposed
> text changes if available, to assist them in producing a revised draft of
> the proposal.
> Alan Barrett
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list