Last Call for Comment on New IPv6 Policy

[bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com]

> 
> 
> >> I don;t beleive we will have an RFC of this topic ready before
> >> the board is ready to consider the proposed policy and so
> >> in referencing material that is, in another fourm, still in
> >> draft format, should not be a significant problem. It was not
> >> a problem for APNIC or RIPE.
> >
> >i suspect that the arin board is competent to deal with that
> >problem should it arise.
> 
> Thanks, Randy.  :-)
> 
> Bill, I expect that there will AT LEAST be a later draft.  I'm not
> proposing to hold this up, just to use the best and most current version as
> of the date on which the Board takes up the issue.
> 

	That seems reasonable. However there is the possiblity that
	the IESG may put into play some material that the membership has not
	seen or approved. This has happened before. 
 	To give tacit approval to any future work that might be 
	"best and most current" or may have all sorts of interesting 
	modifications and ammendments is not being fair to the membership, 
	regardless of the competency of the board or well-meaning IESG 
	members. The membership seems to have settled on the policy as 
	stated in the current IETF ID.  Not some possible proposed new 
	wording. Do you think it is fair to allow such a loophole past 
	the members?

--bill