[address-policy-wg] Contributions from other RIR representatives (was: Re: 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Cleanup))

On 22/09/2013 18:52, Gert Doering wrote:
> (Though I'm starting to get tempted to request full disclosure of anyone
> who is directly affiliated with a regional registry, as when judging
> consensus, I'm going to look very closely at contributions from RIR
> employees, board members, etc. from different regions that operate in
> a very different situation as far as remaining IPv4 address space is 
> concerned.)

People who have relationships with other RIRs are part of the RIPE
Community, so I don't think there are any formal grounds to dismiss their
opinions when evaluating consensus.

On the other hand, if someone who has a relationship with a RIR actively
takes part in policy discussion in another RIR, it's easy to see how this
could be seen as interference - particularly so if the person involved
doesn't hold resources from or have any particular relationship to the
other RIR.

Difficult dilemma.  I'd feel more comfortable if we could depend on
peoples' tact and common sense when contributing outside their areas,
rather than creating rules and guidelines to deal with the situation.  The
fewer rules, the better.  If there are guidelines, they should be RIR
organisational guidelines which apply to the RIR representatives rather
than to the policy groups where they're contributing to.

Nick