On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Sascha Luck <lists-ripe@c4inet.net> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 04:15:19PM +0000, Nick Hilliard wrote:

2.2. re-open the discussion about resource certification at half-cock,
which will lead to a re-run of the same arguments put forward for 2008-08.
The intention of the policy change here is to fix a policy bug, and it
would be a shame to have it ending up as an unnecessary re-hash of 2008-08.

Damn. I never looked at it from that angle. Nick is right, this creates
RPKI policy by the back-door.

I'm not so sure it does, the word "may" doesn't obligate the NCC to do anything.
 


The easiest and simplest thing would be to drop the sentence completely, at
which point the de-facto RIPE NCC procedures concerning certification will
apply.  If this seems like a sensible and pragmatic approach to others, I
can oblige from the policy proposal point of view.  Or someone else can, if
they want.

In light of the above, this is eminently the most sensible solution.


Probably.


--
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel