26 Mar
2018
26 Mar
'18
4:28 p.m.
On 26 Mar 2018, at 14:21, Malcolm Hutty <malcolm@linx.net> wrote:
The real meat of proposing a GIR is saying "let's have a new institution, that has
- THIS structure - THIS funding model - THIS secretariat/support/NCC equivalent - THIS type of PDP - THIS model for who participates in the PDP (both in theory and practice) etc.
Until you have a proposal (at least in outline) for what that looks like, you don't *have* a proposal at all, just a vague idea of address management by Coca-Cola*.
Indeed. IIRC the same points were made when there were vague proposals about the ITU becoming an RIR ~10 years ago. Those proposals were a bad idea then. So’s this LACNIC proposal now. And for many of the same reasons. Sigh.