I agree with the sentiment as presented here much more than the
previous version.
As written however, I'm unsure of what the proposal would actually be
implementing.
The proposal states:
IPv4 policy proposals should be carefully examined to ensure that they
are really necessary
Agree!
and they address real needs that can not be
accomplished with existing processes.
No complaints here!
Discussion of the problem should
preceed proposals for new policy to address the problem.
Yep - agree once again. We would be better off talking about problems
and having a more inclusive method of going from a problem statement
to a policy proposal if necessary.
So I think the idea of Problem Statement -> Discussion -> Solutions
Proposed -> Discussion -> Policy Proposal is sound.
My question is how would we implement that, because at least a bit of
that should be included in this policy so we know what we're in for.
Regards,
Dean