[rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal - Hierarchical Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)

[Frank Habicht]

Hi,

inline...

On 7/17/2026 6:48 PM, Gugu Dhlamini wrote:
[snip]
> The Internet’s resilience comes from minimizing unnecessary dependencies 
> and preserving operator autonomy. If hierarchical AS-SET naming is 
> genuinely required for operational efficiency,

it is.

> the proposal should 
> clearly demonstrate that existing mechanisms are insufficient

the proposal has done that.
And you suggesting that it has not is not accepted.

> and that 
> the benefits outweigh the costs of additional policy complexity. 

The benefit: the internet continuing to work (mostly) as intended.
Any costs...???

> Convenience alone is not a sufficient basis for expanding registry- 
> managed structures.

Since there was a clear problem statement in the proposal, you can not 
allege "convenience alone".

You should retract this statement.

Unless you get paid well enough, then you can keep it for the money's sake.

> This also relates to the broader “stability fallacy”: the assumption 
> that more structure, more policy, or more institutional mechanisms 
> necessarily create more stability.

For those that understand what is proposed, we also understand that this 
creates more stability and it is not an assumption.

Please don't assume that we are assuming.

I'm not talking about "more structure, more policy, or more 
institutional mechanisms". we are discussing a specific proposal here.

Dear co-chair, I believe contributions that are alleging an "assumption" 
when there is none should be disregarded.


> In many cases, long-term stability is 
> better served by simplicity, interoperability, and clear separation 
> between registry administration and operator decision-making.

Yes, "many cases". Not this one. I believe the "many cases" are not 
including the proposal discussed here.


> The burden of proof should therefore rest with proponents to demonstrate 
> that this proposal addresses a concrete operational problem

Oh, the problem statement was included in the proposal.
You are almost suggesting that it wasn't there, which is a bit insulting.

> that cannot 
> be solved through existing practices, voluntary coordination, or tooling 
> improvements outside the policy framework.

How do you suggest to solve it?


Regards,
Frank Habicht