Impact Analysis Is Mandatory - Análisis-Impacto-Obligatorio

General information

Español
30/08/2021
Did not reach consensus
0 %.

Jordi Palet Martínez - Version [1, 2, 3]
In discussion
30/08/2021
First consensus
25/10/2021 - 08/11/2021
Did not reach consensus
25/10/2021

Public comments by LACNIC staff for this version

LACNIC Staff's Interpretation of the Proposal

Author: Jordi Palet Martínez

Applicability:
This proposal updates the PDP.

Modifications to the current text:
This proposal would modify PDP Section “3.2.1. Functions of the PDP Chairs” and add a new paragraph to Section “4. Responsibilities and obligations of LACNIC.”

Proposal Text:
3.2.1. Functions of the PDP Chairs
• To receive comments from the LACNIC Staff on various aspects of a policy proposal, in addition to the corresponding Impact Analysis.

4. Responsibilities and obligations of LACNIC
LACNIC will publish an Impact Analysis (IA) of each version of a proposal (informing this on the Public Policy List) within a maximum of six weeks. In special cases, this period may be reasonably extended, justifying the reasons for doing so and, if possible, with the presentation of a draft. The impact analysis will clarify the staff's interpretation of the proposal and may include, among others, notes on the implementation of the proposal, changes with respect to prior versions, comments, recommendations, the proposal’s impact on the registry system or other impacts, implementation costs, legal aspects, and related references.

Considering the extraordinary workload that an event involves, the four-week period prior the Public Policy Forum will not be considered working days for the purpose of new proposals or new versions of proposals that include significant modifications. Regardless of this, LACNIC will attempt to comply with the requirement to publish the documents.

LACNIC Staff Comments:
1) LACNIC believes that an impact analysis is a useful tool that provides additional input for policy discussions. However, the chairs and the community can begin to discuss each proposal even if the corresponding impact analysis is not yet ready. In fact, this is desirable.
2) It makes sense for impact analyses to be prepared based on the version of a policy proposal currently under discussion, not on a version that has already been updated. This means that some versions of a proposal might not have their own impact analyses if two or more versions overlap.
3) We do our best to make sure that any impact analysis we publish is complete, yet on occasion additional relevant information may be obtained from different sources (staff, members of the community, other RIRs, etc.). In such cases, LACNIC assesses whether to update an impact analysis that has already been published or simply share this information during the Forum or through the Policy list.

Recommendations:
1) We have no further recommendations regarding this version of the proposal.

Official Sources:
Not applicable.

Impact of the policy on the registry and/or other systems
The approval of this proposal would not affect LACNIC's systems, but it would increase the time commitment required from the staff.
It should be mentioned that impact analyses were originally produced solely as input for the ratification process of certain policies by the Board. Thus, if this proposal is approved, we would go from a best effort to a mandatory requirement involving certain levels of compliance. Consequently, specific resources would have to be assigned to prepare these analyses.


Summary

This proposal updates the PDP in light of the doubts that have been raised regarding the mandatory nature of impact analyses.

It also establishes deadlines for these analyses, as currently no deadlines are specified.

Rationale (Describe the problem you intend to solve)

Section 3.2.1. currently lists the functions of the PDP chairs, one of which is to receive comments from the LACNIC staff regarding different aspects of a policy proposal. Because receiving these comments is one of the functions of the PDP chairs, it follows that the staff must prepare such comments. Indeed, the LACNIC staff have been doing so for several years now, even though these comments are communicated to the community.

In a recent email exchange (https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/politicas/2020-August/005768.html), the staff pointed out that they do this at their own initiative, which raises doubts regarding the interpretation of the PDP and requires clarification.

They also noted that preparing impact analyses takes time and that this time needs to be variable. However, an earlier email (https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/politicas/2020-August/005765.html) included a study showing that the different time requirements do not appear to be reasonable, even in the case of simple proposals or new versions that include changes that are practically editorial in nature and that address comments from a prior analysis.

The proposal also seeks to solve situations where there have been delays or faults in the communication of these analyses. All of this has been more appropriately located in section 4, which addresses LACNIC's responsibilities and obligations.

Current text

3.2.1. Functions of the PDP Chairs

• To receive comments from LACNIC's Staff in relation to different aspects of a policy proposal. These comments may include, among others, comments on the wording of a proposal, cost of implementing a proposal, legal aspects, and where to include a proposal within the LACNIC Policy Manual.

4. Responsibilities and obligations of LACNIC

(added)

New text
Analyze diff

3.2.1. Functions of the PDP Chairs

(eliminated)

4. Responsibilities and obligations of LACNIC

• LACNIC will publish an Impact Analysis (IA) of each version of a proposal (informing this on the Public Policy List), within a maximum of four weeks. In special cases, this period may be extended by a maximum of two weeks, justifying the reasons for doing so and with the presentation of a draft. The impact analysis will clarify the staff's interpretation of the proposal and may include, among others, notes on the implementation of the proposal, changes with respect to prior versions, comments, recommendations, the proposal’s impact on the registry system or other impacts, implementation cost, legal aspects and related references.

Additional information

-

Timetable

Immediate implementation

References

• AFRINIC's PDP is relatively similar to LACNIC's. It does not specify a deadline and establishes that the chairs may request AFRINIC to provide an analysis of the impact of the draft policy proposal. However, a year ago, because the staff was not submitting these analyses, they publicly agreed (https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2019/009844.html) that they would automatically send them with each new proposal/version. A policy proposal has also been submitted to make impact analyses mandatory and establishing a four-week deadline for new proposals and a two-week deadline for new versions of an existing proposal.
https://afrinic.net/policy/manual
https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-005-d1#proposal

• APNIC's PDP is very different and includes only five steps. Despite the fact that impact analyses are not included in the PDP, these are being prepared automatically.

• ARIN's PDP is also very different and does not explicitly mention impact analyses. Despite this, an impact analysis is presented when a proposal is accepted by the AC, usually within four weeks.

• RIPE's PDP is slightly different. The Discussion Phase, however, specifies that the RIPE NCC must conduct and publish an impact analysis within a period of four weeks and does not allow this period to be extended.
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-710

Presented at:

LACNIC 34 online (06/10/2020)


Summary

This proposal updates the PDP to consider the doubts that have been raised regarding the mandatory nature of impact analyses.

It also uses the opportunity to establish deadlines for these analyses.

Rationale (Describe the problem you intend to solve)

The current text in section 3.2.1. refers to the functions of the PDP chairs, which include receiving comments from the LACNIC staff regarding various aspects of a policy proposal. These comments may be different from the impact analyses (IA) prepared by the staff, which are not mentioned in the current PDP and yet have been prepared for many years, with the staff communicating them to the community.

In a recent email exchange (https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/politicas/2020-August/005768.html), the staff pointed out that this is done at their own initiative, which raises doubts regarding the interpretation of the PDP and requires clarification.

They also specified that this requires time and that this time must be variable. However, in an earlier email (https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/politicas/2020-August/005765.html), it was noted that the differences in the time required do not appear to be reasonable, even in the case of simple proposals or new versions that include changes that are practically editorial in nature and that address precisely comments from the previous analyses.

It is also a question of solving situations where there have been delays or problems in the communication of these analyses. All of this has been more appropriately located in section 4, which addresses LACNIC's responsibilities and obligations.

Finally, by not counting the weeks prior to the Public Policy Forums, the staff will not need to be involved in the preparation of impact analyses for any new proposals, which will discourage authors from publishing proposals too close to these events, except for new versions which are often (such as this very proposal) quite obvious and it might be said that they directly solve the weaknesses detected by the impact analysis.

Current text

3.2.1. Functions of the PDP Chairs

• To receive comments from LACNIC's Staff in relation to different aspects of a policy proposal. These comments may include, among others, comments on the wording of a proposal, cost of implementing a proposal, legal aspects, and where to include a proposal within the LACNIC Policy Manual.

4. Responsibilities and obligations of LACNIC

(added)

New text
Analyze diff

3.2.1. Functions of the PDP Chairs

• To receive comments from the LACNIC Staff on various aspects of a policy proposal, in addition to the corresponding Impact Analysis.

4. Responsibilities and obligations of LACNIC

• LACNIC will publish an Impact Analysis (IA) of each version of a proposal (informing this on the Public Policy List) within a maximum of four weeks. In special cases, this period may be reasonably extended, justifying the reasons for doing so and, if possible, with the presentation of a draft. The impact analysis will clarify the staff's interpretation of the proposal and may include, among others, notes on the implementation of the proposal, changes with respect to prior versions, comments, recommendations, the proposal’s impact on the registry system or other impacts, implementation costs, legal aspects and related references.

Considering the extraordinary workload involved in the events, the four-week period prior the Public Policy Forum will not be considered working days for the purpose of new proposals or new versions of proposals that include significant modifications. Regardless of this, LACNIC will attempt to comply with the requirement to publish the documents.

Additional information

References:

• AFRINIC's PDP, which is relatively similar to LACNIC's, does not specify a deadline and states that the chairs may request AFRINIC to provide an analysis of the impact of the draft policy proposal. However, a year ago, given that the staff was not submitting these analyses, they publicly agreed (https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2019/009844.html) that they would automatically send them with each new proposal/version. A policy proposal has also been submitted to make impact analyses mandatory and establishing a four-week deadline for new proposals and a two-week deadline for new versions.
https://afrinic.net/policy/manual
https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-005-d1#proposal

• APNIC's PDP is very different and includes only five steps. Despite the fact that it does not include an impact analysis, these have been automatically prepared for some time.

• ARIN's PDP is also very different and does not explicitly include an impact analysis, although the impact analysis is presented when a proposal is accepted by the AC, usually within four weeks.

• RIPE's PDP is slightly different. However, the Discussion Phase specifies that the RIPE NCC must conduct and publish an impact analysis within a period of four weeks and does not allow this period to be extended.
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-710

Timetable

Immediate implementation

References

-

Presented at:

LACNIC35 (11/05/2021)


Summary

This proposal updates the PDP to consider the doubts that have been raised regarding the mandatory nature of impact analyses.

It also uses the opportunity to establish deadlines for these analyses.

Rationale (Describe the problem you intend to solve)

The current text in section 3.2.1. refers to the functions of the PDP chairs, which include receiving comments from the LACNIC staff regarding various aspects of a policy proposal. These comments may be different from the impact analyses (IA) prepared by the staff, which are not mentioned in the current PDP and yet have been prepared for many years, with the staff communicating them to the community.

In a recent email exchange (https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/olíticas/2020-August/005768.html), the staff pointed out that this is done at their own initiative, which raises doubts regarding the interpretation of the PDP and requires clarification.

They also specified that this requires time and that this time must be variable. However, in an earlier email (https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/olíticas/2020-August/005765.html), it was noted that the differences in the time required do not appear to be reasonable, even in the case of simple proposals or new versions that include changes that are practically editorial in nature and that address comments from the previous analyses.

It is also a question of solving situations where there have been delays or problems in the communication of these analyses. All of this has been more appropriately placed in section 4, which addresses LACNIC's responsibilities and obligations.

Finally, by not counting the weeks prior to the Public Policy Forums, the staff will not need to be involved in the preparation of impact analyses for any new proposals, which will discourage authors from publishing proposals too close to these events, except for new versions which are often (such as this very proposal) quite obvious and it might be said that they directly solve the weaknesses detected by the impact analysis.

Current text

3.2.1. Functions of the PDP Chairs

• To receive comments from LACNIC's Staff in relation to different aspects of a policy proposal. These comments may include, among others, comments on the wording of a proposal, cost of implementing a proposal, legal aspects, and where to include a proposal within the LACNIC Policy Manual.

4. Responsibilities and obligations of LACNIC

(added)

New text
Analyze diff

3.2.1. Functions of the PDP Chairs

• To receive comments from the LACNIC Staff on various aspects of a policy proposal, in addition to the corresponding Impact Analysis.

4. Responsibilities and obligations of LACNIC

• LACNIC will publish an Impact Analysis (IA) of each version of a proposal (informing this on the Public Policy List) within a maximum of six weeks. In special cases, this period may be reasonably extended, justifying the reasons for doing so and, if possible, with the presentation of a draft The impact analysis will clarify the staff's interpretation of the proposal and may include, among others, notes on the implementation of the proposal, changes with respect to prior versions, comments, recommendations, the proposal’s impact on the registry system or other impacts, implementation costs, legal aspects, and related references.

Considering the extraordinary workload that an event involves, the four-week period prior the Public Policy Forum will not be considered working days for the purpose of new proposals or new versions of proposals that include significant modifications. Regardless of this, LACNIC will attempt to comply with the requirement to publish the documents.

Additional information

-

Timetable

Immediate implementation

References

• AFRINIC's PDP, which is relatively similar to LACNIC's, does not specify a deadline and states that the chairs may request AFRINIC to provide an analysis of the impact of the draft policy proposal. However, a year ago, given that the staff was not submitting these analyses, they publicly agreed (https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2019/009844.html) that they would automatically send them with each new proposal/version. A policy proposal has also been submitted to make impact analyses mandatory and establishing a four-week deadline for new proposals and a two-week deadline for new versions.
https://afrinic.net/policy/manual
https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-005-d1#proposal

• APNIC's PDP is very different and includes only five steps. Despite the fact thta it does not include an impact analysis, these are being automatically prepared for some time.

• ARIN's PDP is also very different and does not explicitly include an impact analysis, although the impact analysis is presented when a proposal is accepted by the AC, usually within four weeks.

• RIPE's PDP is slightly different. However, the Discussion Phase specifies that the RIPE NCC must conduct and publish an impact analysis within a period of four weeks and does not allow this period to be extended.
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-710

Presented at:

-