Dear task force members, Please find attached an updated version of the report - which we hope to publish on Friday to keep our stated deadline. Aside from a couple of tiny fixes here and there, a new section has been added that begins on page 16, called "Putting RIPE Documents into Context." This is in response to feedback on RIPE List after we published our draft. Apologies for the close deadline, but please share any final comments on the updated document by end of tomorrow (13 December). Cheers Antony
Dear task force members, Please find attached an updated version of the report - which we hope to publish on Friday to keep our stated deadline. Aside from a couple of tiny fixes here and there, a new section has been added that begins on page 16, called "Putting RIPE Documents into Context." This is in response to feedback on RIPE List after we published our draft. Apologies for the close deadline, but please share any final comments on the updated document by end of tomorrow (13 December). Cheers Antony
Please also find a PDF, in case that is easier. On 12/12/2018 18:18, Antony Gollan wrote:
Dear task force members,
Please find attached an updated version of the report - which we hope to publish on Friday to keep our stated deadline.
Aside from a couple of tiny fixes here and there, a new section has been added that begins on page 16, called "Putting RIPE Documents into Context." This is in response to feedback on RIPE List after we published our draft.
Apologies for the close deadline, but please share any final comments on the updated document by end of tomorrow (13 December).
Cheers
Antony
Thanks Anthony for sharing this version of the document. Just some minor points. On page 7/8 there is mentioning of 'vote stuffing', can you explain what it means? On page 9 in brackets the words 'with something to say' I suggest deleting. As I am not regularly attending RIPE meetings I would not be able to discern between Ripe policy and Ripe documents unless that is clarified. Best regards, Wim -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: accountability-tf <accountability-tf-bounces@ripe.net> Namens Antony Gollan Verzonden: woensdag 12 december 2018 18:19 Aan: accountability-tf@ripe.net Onderwerp: Re: [Accountability-tf] Updated Draft Document - Feedback by 13 December Please also find a PDF, in case that is easier. On 12/12/2018 18:18, Antony Gollan wrote:
Dear task force members,
Please find attached an updated version of the report - which we hope to publish on Friday to keep our stated deadline.
Aside from a couple of tiny fixes here and there, a new section has been added that begins on page 16, called "Putting RIPE Documents into Context." This is in response to feedback on RIPE List after we published our draft.
Apologies for the close deadline, but please share any final comments on the updated document by end of tomorrow (13 December).
Cheers
Antony
Dit bericht kan informatie bevatten die niet voor u is bestemd. Indien u niet de geadresseerde bent of dit bericht abusievelijk aan u is gezonden, wordt u verzocht dat aan de afzender te melden en het bericht te verwijderen. De Staat aanvaardt geen aansprakelijkheid voor schade, van welke aard ook, die verband houdt met risico's verbonden aan het elektronisch verzenden van berichten. This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. The State accepts no liability for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent in the electronic transmission of messages.
Dear all, On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 06:18:27PM +0100, Antony Gollan wrote:
Aside from a couple of tiny fixes here and there, a new section has been added that begins on page 16, called "Putting RIPE Documents into Context." This is in response to feedback on RIPE List after we published our draft.
without endorsing this too tight deadline, I've read this version. No issue with the minor changes. On "Putting RIPE Documents into Context", I think this section has become a bit too long and confusing by trying to catch too many details. This is also not all about newcomers, so that reference I'd consider obsolete. I would claim that "There is generally a shared understanding of what RIPE Documents are and how they function within the RIPE community" is a bit too optimistic. This might be true for policy documents, but the issue is that there's no clear understanding who can approve documents ("streams" in RFC Editor parlance) and what weight or impact they have (similar to RFC status). "We therefore feel able to provide a general overview. However, as with the earlier section on consensus - nothing in this description should be read as creating new rules or requirements that the community must adhere to." My feelings are different. Also, "new" rules aren't the issue - this captioning is at best descriptive, not normative - in the sense that it should not claim to formally describe the current practice. The open questions are: What "streams' do exist: we know "RIPE Policy" and "RIPE NCC Document" (and there might be hybrids, thinking of the RIPE DB), but obviously a lot of documents don't fall into these two categories. I'd also differentiate between 'endorsing a policy' and 'publishing a document', especially given that at east plenary 'endorsements' are genereally a ceremonial act of little value. We've found (in our conversation with Daniel) that the houskeeping on document status, especially regarding the earlier documents, could be improved. In general, the question of updating, superseding or obsoleting documents or sets of documents has been unclear. I think the recommendation should be stronger by reducing the "consider" indirection. regards, Peter
participants (3)
-
Antony Gollan -
Peter Koch -
Rullens, drs. W.M. (Wim)