On 07/03/2016 22:12, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 09:08:47AM +0000, Brian Nisbet wrote:
I may have missed the logic behind this. Any RIPE WG can make policy, why should AA-WG be any different?
aawg is not different, the problem is precisely that any WG can make policy. There should be ONE list on which policy is debated and consensus, if any, is determined. Which is the way other RIRs work and which is the way RIPE was *supposed* to work before a lot of empire-building happened (see how apwg is the only list with "policy" in the name?)
Empire building? I fear your view of the life of working group chairs differs greatly from reality. However if people wish this to change, there is, of course, a way to achieve that, in a bottom-up fashion. AP-WG also has the word "Address" in it and not all policies deal directly with addresses.
I do not want to be subscribed to every godsdamn mailing list @ripe.net, but I *have* to because otherwise some policy will be imposed on me that I never even heard about and that supposedly "has reached consensus".
And this is why we have policy announce, so you don't have to. policy-announce@ripe.net AP-WG will be the source of most policies, of course, but keeping an eye on policy-announce means you can pop in and out of other lists as necessary. Brian