Hello Sander,<br><br>many thanks for your proposal.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Sander Steffann <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:sander@steffann.nl">sander@steffann.nl</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Hi Geza,<br>
<br>
I must admit that policy development has been very slow in some cases, but we also have had cases where the PDP was completed in months. But I see your point.<br></blockquote><div><br>Thanks.<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">

<br>
But setting an arbitrary limit still feels wrong to me. How about taking this a bit further and reviewing policies regularly, like for example at every RIPE meeting? And we could review more than just the IPv6 PI policy...<br>

<br>
It will cause extra work for us as chairs, but it might be useful to do.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
- Sander<br></font></blockquote><div><br>I still think it is better to set a limit with an educated guess and review it  on the RIPE meeting...<br><br>This would allow us fexibility while the process can not become uncontrolled. There will be no unforeseen side effects....<br>
<br>Thanks again,<br><br>Géza <br></div></div><br>