[address-policy-wg] Unique prefixes for all proposals

I agree that it would be really great to have a unique naming
mechanism for policy proposals across regions.  I'd also like to
suggest that somehow Global Policies have some consistent naming
mechanism across regions, so that they stand out a bit and folks can
follow the conversation across regions.  Maybe instead of RIR-  it
could be NRO-    Global Policies being the ones enacted across all
RIR's and spell out the actions between RIR's and IANA. For example,
"Global Policy for IPv4 Allocations by the IANA Post Exhaustion"

 --Heather

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Richard Hartmann <richih at richih.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am aware that this list is not ideal for my concern; I simply
> defaulted to the least inappropriate list.
>
> One of my pet peeves is that the RIRs use clashing naming schemes for
> their proposals. If someone talks about proposal 2010-1 and does not
> provide context, there is an unnecessary burden on people figuring out
> if this the RIPE's or the ARIN's proposal they are talking about.
>
> The solution is simpe: A unique prefix.
>
> Possible suggestions for prefixes include:
>
> * ripe-
>  The obvious choice. Short, precise, lower case. A potential problem
> is that once ripe documents reach a certain count, there might be
> confusion over the proposal ripe-2020-1 vs the document ripe-2010,
> i.e. that there is nothing specifying that we are talking about a
> proposal.
>
> * ripe-proposal-
>  Unique, but long.
>
> * ripe-draft-
>  Unique, not 100% correct with RIPE's naming scheme, but shorter.
>
> * ripe-prop-
>  Unique, similar to how APNIC and AfriNIC handle things.
>
> * RIPE-
>  Unique, short, somewhat ugly, does not specify that this is a
> proposal. Analogous to how LACNIC handles it.
>
>
> I am not sure if this warrants its own proposal which is why I am
> simply throwing the issue out in the open to see what the community at
> large thinks about this issue.
>
> Personally, I would tend towards "ripe-prop-". It's reasonably short
> but leaves room for expansion (ripe-doc-, etc) and unification.
>
>
> Any and all feedback welcome :)
> Richard
>
>