LACNIC Staff's Interpretation of the Proposal
Author:
Tomas Lynch
Applicability:
This proposal introduces changes to the PDP.
Modifications to the current text:
The proposal modifies sections “3.2.1. Functions of the PDP Chairs” and “4. Responsibilities and Obligations of LACNIC.”
Proposed Text:
(Delete 3.2.1 "Decide whether to abandon a policy” and add the following text as a new item at the end of “4. Responsibilities and Obligations of LACNIC”).
- After a proposal remains 12 months either in “Did not reach consensus” or “Not ratified” status, the last version of the proposal will automatically be moved to “Abandoned” status.
LACNIC Staff Comments:
1- We reiterate that, if this proposal reaches consensus, it will apply to versions submitted after its ratification.
Recommendations:
There are no further recommendations regarding this version of the proposal.
Impact of the policy on the registry and/or other systems
This policy proposal will be implemented manually until it is implemented in the system as an automatic mechanism.
Proposal statuses are classified as transitory (e.g., “Under discussion”), semi-permanent (e.g., “Abandoned”), and permanent (with the only permanent status being “Implemented”). A semi-permanent status is acceptable, as a proposal with this status may be resumed by the original or a different author.
However, there is a fourth class of statuses that the author of this proposal defines as semi-transitory, which includes “Did not reach consensus” and “Not ratified.” A proposal can remain in these statuses for a long time without the community knowing whether the authors will submit a new version or simply withdraw the proposal.
As of the day of submitting this proposal, there are 6 (six) proposals in the LACNIC policy system with the status "Did not reach consensus.” The community —including the PDP chairs— are unaware of whether the authors will submit a new version or decide to abandon/withdraw these proposals, some of which have had this status since October 2021.
While the functions of the PDP chairs include “to decide whether a policy is abandoned,” this text is very simple and refers to policies, not proposals. Likewise, it does not provide any guidance on when the chairs should decide that a proposal has been abandoned. In fact, the chairs might even abuse this function by deciding that a proposal has been abandoned even when its discussion continues.
In view of the above, this proposal defines when a proposal should be considered abandoned, defining a 10-month period as the maximum time for authors to decide what to do with their proposal.
Justificación(Describa el problema que pretende solucionar)Even though this status should be transitory, some proposals remain in the “Did not reach consensus” status for lengthy periods of time. The chairs often contact the authors but receive no answer regarding whether a new version of the proposal will be submitted, or the proposal will be abandoned / withdrawn from the system. While the functions of the PDP chairs include deciding whether a proposal has been abandoned, it does not specify when and under which conditions the chairs should proceed. This proposal seeks to provide the chair with guidelines for deciding when a proposal has been abandoned.
Texto actual3.2.1 Functions of the PDP Chairs
…
To decide whether to abandon a policy.
(Delete 3.2.1 “Decide whether to abandon a policy” and add the following text as a new item at the end of 3.2.4. Responsibilities and obligations of PDP Chairs)
- If the author does not submit a new proposal or communicate their decision to withdraw the proposal within 10 months after the proposal fails to reach consensus or is not ratified, the chairs shall request LACNIC to change the status of the proposal to “Abandoned”.
Información adicionalThis proposal does not compete with LAC-2020-6 version 4 - Miscellaneous Modifications to the PDP, but rather helps to reinforce the difference between a withdrawn and an abandoned proposal.
Tiempo de implementación-
Referencias-
Presentado en:LACNIC 40 (04/10/2023)
Proposal statuses are classified as transitory (e.g., “Under discussion”) and permanent (e.g., “Implemented”). However, there is a third status that the author of this proposal defines as semi-permanent. This includes “Did not reach consensus” and “Not ratified.” A proposal can remain in this status for extended periods, leaving the community uncertain about whether the authors will submit a new version or simply withdraw the proposal.
On the date of the submission of this new version of the proposal, there are several proposals in the LACNIC policy system in “Did not reach consensus” status. However, some of them have been in this status since October 2021, with no communication from the author regarding their intention to submit a new version.
Thus, although the functions of the PDP chairs include “To decide whether a policy is abandoned,” this text is very simple and mentions policies, not proposals. In addition, no guidance is provided regarding when the chairs should decide that a proposal has been abandoned. In fact, under the current text, the chairs might even abuse this function by deciding that a proposal has been abandoned even when the discussion continues. Furthermore, because the current text mentions “policies,” a misguided moderator could decide to remove an item from the Policy Manual or the PDP without prior discussion.
Version 2 of this proposal takes this responsibility away from the moderators and makes it part of LACNIC's responsibilities. The new version specifies that LACNIC will automatically consider a proposal abandoned after 12 calendar months.
To achieve this, the item “To decide whether to abandon a policy” is deleted from section 3.2.1 of the PDP and the corresponding text is added in Chapter 4, Responsibilities and Obligations of LACNIC.
Justificación(Describa el problema que pretende solucionar)Some proposals remain in “Did not reach consensus” status for extended periods of time, despite the fact that this status should be transitory. The chairs often contact the authors but receive no answer about whether a new version of the proposal will be submitted or the proposal will be abandoned / withdrawn from the system. While the functions of the PDP chairs include deciding whether a proposal has been abandoned, the text does not specify when and under which conditions the chairs should proceed. The manual even uses the term “policy” when it should use “proposal” or “policy proposal.”
Furthermore, in earlier versions, there was debate about whether the chairs should be the ones to decide, after a suitable period, if a proposal should be considered abandoned or not. Along with other members of the community, the author believes that a proposal should automatically be considered abandoned by LACNIC after 12 months.
Texto actual3.2.1. Functions of the PDP Chairs
…
- To decide whether to abandon a policy.
(Delete from section 3.2.1 the item “Decide whether to abandon a policy” and add the following text as a new item at the end of “4. Responsibilities and Obligations of LACNIC”).
- After a proposal remains 12 months either in “Did not reach consensus” or “Not ratified” status, the last version of the proposal will automatically be moved to “Abandoned” status.
Información adicionalThis proposal helps reinforce the difference between a proposal that has been withdrawn and a proposal that has been abandoned.
It should be noted that when a proposal reaches second consensus, it moves on to “Ratification by the Board” status.
Tiempo de implementación-
Referencias-
Presentado en:LACNIC 41 (08/05/2024)