<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Nov 17, 2021, at 00:35 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" class="">rpd@afrinic.net</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta charset="UTF-8" class=""><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;"><div class=""><div style="margin: 0cm; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span lang="ES-TRAD" style="font-size: 12pt;" class="">Below in-line<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0cm; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span lang="ES-TRAD" style="font-size: 12pt;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0cm; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span lang="ES-TRAD" style="font-size: 12pt;" class="">Regards,<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span lang="ES-TRAD" style="font-size: 12pt;" class="">Jordi<o:p class=""></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span lang="ES-TRAD" style="font-size: 12pt;" class="">@jordipalet<o:p class=""></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span lang="ES-TRAD" style="font-size: 12pt;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></span></p></div><div style="margin: 0cm; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span lang="ES-TRAD" style="font-size: 12pt;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0cm; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span lang="ES-TRAD" style="font-size: 12pt;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></span></div><div class=""><div class=""><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0cm 35.4pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">El 16/11/21 16:29, "Owen DeLong" <<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com" style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;" class="">owen@delong.com</a>> escribió:<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0cm 35.4pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0cm 35.4pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0cm 35.4pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><br class=""><br class=""><o:p class=""></o:p></div><blockquote style="margin-top: 5pt; margin-bottom: 5pt;" class="" type="cite"><div class=""><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0cm 35.4pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">On Nov 16, 2021, at 01:48 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;" class="">rpd@afrinic.net</a>> wrote:<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0cm 35.4pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div class=""><div class=""><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt 35.4pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 12pt;" class="">While I agree with you that it is difficult to reach consensus on both policies, we tried several times to get authors from both sides to get together and never happened, and if there is no “copy” of one policy into the other (as this is the case), I think competition is fine.</span><o:p class=""></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 12pt 35.4pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 12pt;" class="">What it will be bad is to copy a policy from one set of authors into another one, and change a few things, because that’s a way to avoid consensus. I don’t think it has been the case here.</span><o:p class=""></o:p></p></div></div></blockquote><div class=""><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0cm 35.4pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0cm 35.4pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">What will also be bad is if we get rough consensus on two policies that modify the same sections of the CPM in conflicting ways.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0cm; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0cm; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 12pt;" class="">[Jordi] Actually not. If proposal A get consensus declared before proposal B, even if you include in the CPM A, then B, what remains is the text of B. That will be according to the PDP. Never mind if A and B declaration of consensus happens with 2 years of difference or just 2 hours. So, in the worst case, if in a single meeting there are 2 competing and conflicting proposals, the chairs have the attribution to decide which one goes last, so that one will prevail. Exactly the same way in the IETF we have documents that update the previous ones!</span></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>This assumes that to be the desired outcome of the community.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>If A and B achieve consensus at the same meeting, I’m not convinced that is necessarily the case, since the order of consensus is determined not by community preference, but merely the order in which they were placed on the agenda.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Further, what remains is not B, what remains is the original text as modified by A with the modifications from B then applied against that. </div><div><br class=""></div><div>For example, consider if we had a policy text that contains “The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog’s back.”</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Proposal A changes the brown fox to a purple rabbit.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Proposal B changes the color of the fox from brown to green and changes the dog into a horse.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Now, let us consider your suggested outcome in light of:</div><div><br class=""></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Agenda covers policy A first then B…</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>“The quick green rabbit jumped over the lazy horse’s back.”</div><div><br class=""></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Agenda covers policy B first, then A…</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>“The quick purple rabbit jumped over the lazy horse’s back.”</div><div><br class=""></div><div>I think we can agree that making the overall policy outcome dependent on the order in which proposals were discussed at a meeting is probably not the ideal result. Further, I think the above shows that this could become a recipe for policies that make no sense, since both proposals were written with the intent of modifying the original language and neither took the other into account.</div><div><br class=""></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;"><div class=""><br class=""><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0cm 35.4pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">If this version missed the deadline, then it missed the deadline. We really need to stop arbitrarily making process exceptions without considering the unintended consequences which may well extend beyond just the bad precedent you describe above. It may effectively disenfranchise participants in the process because they did not expect the late arriving policy to be considered, so they don’t attend the relevant session or they are otherwise unprepared to fully engage on it due to the short timeline.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0cm; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0cm; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 12pt;" class="">[Jordi] There may be an English misinterpretation of the PDP here. But my reading is that “No change can be made to a draft policy within one week of the meeting”, if the meeting starts on 17<sup class="">th</sup>, means that you can’t send a proposal after 9<sup class="">th</sup><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>noon, because the week before the meeting is 10<sup class="">th</sup><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>to 16<sup class="">th</sup>. How do you see that as English native speaker?</span></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>In general, I would interpret it to mean that the text is frozen effectively 168 hours prior to the start of the meeting. Rounding up to include the midnight prior to that point also strikes me as a valid interpretation.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Owen</div><div><br class=""></div><br class=""></body></html>