[rpd] RPD Digest, Vol 222, Issue 111

[jordi.palet at consulintel.es]

If we’ve a single RIR then it will be easy to do all in the same way ;-)

This is something I've advocated for several times, but the problem is that there are different cultural backgrounds, different economies, different time zones, different languages, etc. It could be somehow resolved by having regional offices, etc., but it is a complex problem anyway.

However, we don’t have a single RIR, and while what and how something is being done in different RIRs is important information, doesn’t necessarily need to be considered as relevant as to do it the exactly same way.

So, even if something didn’t required a policy proposal in other regions, this doesn’t mean that other regions community discussion prefer to have a policy proposal, like the one that reached consensus here. In fact, it may happen tomorrow, that in other regions, for whatever reason, it is also decided to make a policy proposal, despite the relevant RIR having already adopted it without a policy. Will then your discourse follow? clearly now!

Let me repeat again: The community is on top of the RIR. The community can take decisions, otherwise will not have a PDP.

Note that even if it is done by means of an exclusive RIR operational decision, still it becomes mandatory, no difference vs a policy decision. The members are bound to both the operational RIR decisions and the policies.

The “central question” that you make is a generic question for all the policies, not only for this policy proposal. If you want to discuss about that, you need to consider if the PDP should have a more clear distinction about what is in scope and what not, and believe me, we had this discussion in all the other RIRs, and never succeded. Limiting the scope of the PDP is near to impossible beyond the obvious (example: we can’t make policies to control how many pets every member can have, but we can have policies about anything related to resource management).

Regards,
Jordi

@jordipalet

> El 21 jul 2026, a las 8:34, Fundiswa Nadia Maseko <fundiswanadia2 at gmail.com> escribió:
> 
> Dear Jordi,
> 
> Kone's point is not that every RIR must follow the same procedure. Rather, his point is that the same technical outcome has been achieved elsewhere without making it binding policy.
> 
> That makes the choice of mechanism relevant.
> 
> A policy process should not be used simply because it is available. The appropriate approach is to use the least powerful mechanism capable of solving the operational problem. If AFRINIC can implement hierarchical naming as an IRR operational change, then proponents should explain what additional technical benefit policy provides.
> 
> Policy introduces enforcement, precedent, and rigidity. Those costs require justification. Saying that "the community prefers it" or "the community wants to move faster" does not explain why an operational matter should become a policy obligation.
> 
> Kone also raised specific factual examples. Those examples deserve direct responses. Suggesting that only those with extensive experience across all RIRs may question the proposal risks turning expertise into gatekeeping rather than evidence-based discussion.
> 
> The central question therefore remains: what can mandatory policy achieve here that an operational implementation cannot?
> 
> Until that question is clearly answered, I support Kone's position and remain opposed.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Fundiswa 


**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.