Re: [lir-wg] Name of the LIR WG
- Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 20:10:37 +0100
Hi Daniel, Gert et.al.!
IF we really consider changing things, after a _very_ careful review
(I hope), I'd have a strong pref to do it in coordination with the other
RIRs' constituencies.
>Hi,
>
>On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 05:40:56PM +0100, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
>> "Registration Policies and Procedures WG" repop-wg ?
>
>I'm not sure whether people will understand "repop-wg" better than
>"lir-wg" :-)
>
>What about "policy-wg"?
"policy" -- policy? what (Internet Content ;-) ??
The best thing I can think of at the moment is sort of copying from
the APNIC region, ie. [IP] Address Policy SIG.
Which (from an ICANN/ASO point of view) still misses the routing
identifier issue, somewhat, and/or potentially starts to pull the
Routing-WG into the boat as well.
And we should be very careful to not _add_ to the confusion in this
process, with
- policy being the "open-ness" thingy where everyone is welcome and a
consensus and/or resource accessibility and distribution decision
should be worked out, and
- defining the procedures, which should ultimately remain the
responsibilty of the NCC and the LIRs in th end, although everyone
should still be welcome to observe and contribute as much as possible.
We should think pretty careful about
- "policy development" for IPv[46] Addresses and Routing Identifiers,
- "LIR <-> RIR procedure definitions" and, in the end,
- "funding agreement".
>Gert Doering
> -- NetMaster
Food for thought,
Wilfried.
