I think Kurtis has already addressed this. I'm assuming that Niall et al will refactor the proposal and submit it through the usual channels. Nigel -----Original Message----- From: ncc-services-wg-bounces@ripe.net [mailto:ncc-services-wg-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Daniel Karrenberg Sent: 23 August 2012 17:20 To: Tore Anderson Cc: Emilio Madaio; Nigel Titley; ncc-services-wg@ripe.net; Rogier Spoor; Andrew de la de la Haye; Sander Steffann; Andrew de la Haye; Niall O'Reilly Subject: Re: [ncc-services-wg] Policy proposal for services to legacy Internet resource holders On 23.08.2012, at 14:12 , Tore Anderson wrote:
* Niall O'Reilly
Please find an initial version of our proposal attached.
Hi,
Having read through very quickly, I'm in general supportive, but I don't think this belongs in the policy text itself:
...
It sounds more like rationale to me (although not a very good one, in my opinion). The next two paragraphs suffice as policy.
There is a lot of such things in the proposal. It would benefit from a very clear separation of rationale, referenced policies, new policy and explanations. Clear and plain policy language should be kept clearly separate from the other parts and should not repeat other existing policy language, but reference it. Daniel