Hi,
On 15 Dec 2023, at 15:32, Maximilian Wilhelm <max@rfc2324.org> wrote:
Hi folks,
Anno domini 2023 Peter Hessler scripsit:
I still support the proposal as-is. The proposed change does not weaken any data that is in the database, and in fact may allow it to be more obvious that these address ranges are used by end users rather than be unclear what their status is.
Furthermore, I will state that Denis' objections are not relevant to the proposal. The proposers, various people on the lists (including myself), and the RIPE NCC themselves all state the opposite of what Denis is saying. In addition the proposers have, in my opinion, addressed the concerns stated.
+1 to what Peter said.
Cheers, Max
I’ll add my +1 as well. I think this discussion has brought the issue to the attention of this community extensively. After reading the history on this mailing list and looking at the impact analysis, I think we have reached the point in rough consensus where Denis’ concerns have been addressed, but not accommodated. This is a valid outcome: "Rough consensus is achieved when all issues are addressed, but not necessarily accommodated” Cheers, Sander