Summary

This proposal incorporates clarifications intended to ensure a consistent interpretation of the PDP, as the current text, in various respects, is open to incorrect interpretations regarding consensus and discussions that have been standard practice in recent years.

Rationale (Describe the problem you intend to solve)

On several occasions, we have observed and discussed that the PDP text refers to “proposals” when it actually means “versions of a proposal.” Changes have been made to correct this misinterpretation, but not throughout the entire document. A comprehensive correction is needed to prevent the variety of interpretations as has already occurred.

We have also clarified on several occasions that we do not present or assess consensus of policies, but rather of policy proposals. There are several other examples of incorrect language use similar to those mentioned above.

It has also become clear that the policy system assigns identification codes automatically, yet the text incorrectly states that a review takes place first, when the actual order is reversed.

Finally, two paragraphs that allowed the discussion period to be restarted without changing the version of the proposal have been amended, since it appears that this is not possible due to issues with the policy system or related to it (the exact details have not been confirmed by the staff). This change does not alter the PDP; it simply requires a new version to be created in the system, regardless of whether it contains any changes.

None of these clarifications is intended to modify the PDP, but rather to bring the text in line with reality and prevent differing interpretations as has recently been the case.

Note: The following text includes only the passages the proposal seeks to clarify; the rest has been omitted to avoid repeating sections that have not been modified.

Current text

3.1. Public Policy List
• Only those subscribed to the Policy mailing list may submit a proposal.
• Formal starting point and end point for policy discussions.
• Policy proposals may be received at any time.
• Proposals must be submitted using the online form available at https://politicas.lacnic.net/politicas/. Once a policy proposal has been reviewed, it will be assigned an identification code and sent to the discussion list. The maximum time allowed for reviewing and publishing the proposal on the Public Policy List must not exceed two weeks.
• Only new proposals published on this list at least two weeks prior to the Public Policy Forum will be presented and discussed at the Forum.

3.2.1. Functions of the PDP Chairs
• To evaluate and suggest consensus in policy discussions.
• To receive comments from LACNIC's Staff in relation to different aspects of a policy proposal.

3.2.4. Responsibilities and obligations of PDP Chairs
• To specify, among other things, which policy proposals will be presented and discussed.
• To post a call for the discussion of any proposal presented by the community on the Public Policy List, including a reminder that the discussion period for each policy proposal is at least 8 weeks and at most the time required for the proposal to be presented at the Public Policy Forum. Consensus may not be called for if a proposal has not been presented and debated in at least one Public Policy Forum.
• At any time during the discussion period, to decide together with the author(s) whether it is advisable to review a proposal and, if so, whether it is necessary to restart the discussion period or whether the changes are minor and/or consensus is expected and therefore allow the same discussion period to continue.
• If consensus is not reached, to decide together with the author(s) whether they would like to publish a new version or withdraw the proposal. If the decision is to continue to discuss the proposal, the eight-week discussion period must be restarted.
• To publish a four-week last call for comments period for any proposal that reaches consensus.

3.5. Public Policy Forum
• Presentation and discussion of policies currently in the PDP.

3.6. LACNIC Board of Directors
• Ratify the proposal.
• Reject the proposal and, through the PDP Chairs, request that the public policy list continue their analysis and submit a new proposal.

New text
Analyze diff

3.1. Public Policy List
• Only those subscribed to the Policy mailing list may submit a proposal (version).
• Formal starting point and end point for the discussion of policy proposal versions.
• Versions of a policy proposal may be received at any time.
• Versions of a policy proposal must be submitted using the online form available at https://politicas.lacnic.net/politicas/. The system will automatically assign an identification code. After review, it will be published and announced on the discussion list. The maximum time allowed for reviewing and publishing a version of a proposal on the Public Policy List must not exceed two weeks.
• Only new versions of proposals published on this list at least two weeks prior to the Public Policy Forum will be presented and discussed at the Forum.

3.2.1. Functions of the PDP Chairs
• To evaluate and suggest consensus in the discussion of policy proposal versions.
• To receive comments from LACNIC's Staff in relation to different aspects of a version of a policy proposal.

3.2.4. Responsibilities and obligations of PDP Chairs
• To specify, among other things, which policy proposal versions will be presented and discussed.
• To post a call for the discussion of any version of a proposal presented by the community on the Public Policy List, including a reminder that the discussion period is at least 8 weeks and at most the time required for the version to be presented at the Public Policy Forum. Consensus may not be called for if a version of a proposal has not been presented and debated in at least one Public Policy Forum.
• At any time during the discussion period, to decide together with the author(s) whether it is advisable to review the version of the proposal and, if so, whether it is necessary to restart the discussion period or whether the changes are minor and can therefore be incorporated during the last call for comments period and/or if consensus is expected.
• If consensus is not reached, to decide together with the author(s) whether they would like to continue the discussion of the proposal (with a new version) or withdraw it.
• To publish a four-week last call for comments for any version of a proposal that reaches consensus.

3.5. Public Policy Forum
• Presentation and discussion of policy proposal versions currently in the PDP.

3.6. LACNIC Board of Directors
• Accept the version of the proposal.
• Reject the version of the proposal and, through the PDP chairs, request that the Public Policy List continue their analysis and submit a new proposal or version.

Additional information

Additional information:
In all other RIRs, despite the differences among the PDPs, there is no doubt that the PDP’s interpretation always refers to versions of proposals and there has never been any misinterpretation in this regard.

In the case of RIPE, a version of a proposal can reach consensus without having been presented at any Public Forum (or its equivalent), i.e., solely through the mailing list. In the other RIRs, consensus can only be reached if that version of the proposal has been presented at a Public Forum (or its equivalent).

In the case of LACNIC, proposal LAC-2019-8 (v4) introduced the possibility of bypassing the requirement to present a version of a proposal at the Public Forum, such that when objections which had previously prevented consensus were resolved through minor changes, presenting that version at the Public Forum was no longer necessary. Similarly, proposal LAC-2020-6 adjusted the last call for comments so that editorial changes would be incorporated into a new version; by restarting the last call for comments and based on LAC-2019-8, this avoided the need for a new presentation at the Public Forum.

Timetable

-

References

-

Presented at:

-