Re: [ga] [Fwd: [address-policy-wg] ICANN Ratifies Global Policy for Allocation of IPv6 Address Space]

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

I think there is a Latin phrase for it something along the lines of en exclusivio est inclusio, which is a translating instruction meaning if something is left out then that is the intent of the drafter. It presumes competence and that in that competence omission was intentional. I think that by not saying much they have spoke volumes.
   
  e

Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  Martin Hannigan wrote:

>> The ICANN announcement is available from the ICANN website at:
>> http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-11sep06.htm

It's not that odd of a policy, except that it tends to be based more on 
faith in the RIRs than in detailed specifics. But there is a fair 
amount of real experience from the IPv4 world built into it.

But as a "policy" it is significantly lacking with regard to the quality 
and nature of the obligations that the RIRs ought to follow in their own 
delegations. In that regard it is more of a supplicating kow-tow on the 
part of ICANN in the direction of the RIRs than as a policy that is 
designed to improved the stability of the internet for the benefit of all.

But when we compare it to DNS policy - it stands head and shoulders 
above. This is because this *is* technical and largely insulated from 
commercial and political pressures (except the regional and national 
demands for address space.)

I got the impression that no one on the board actually read this policy 
- it is not only vague and subjective, but also has internal references 
that are dangling. Like what is "Item A"?

--karl--



 		
---------------------------------
Get your email and more, right on the  new Yahoo.com