Sorry, no. The question was about guiding principles for an updated
ICP between the RIRs. That's what I responded to: improvements to that
document not "concerns" about individual RIRs.

You also requested a tangent about detail-level changes I might make
to the RIRs themselves, so I offered some ideas born from my direct
experience. Sorry that confused you.
 
Repeating my original question:

What is, in your opinion, the perfect scenario by which the functions of the RIRs today could be structured?  The 'if I could greenfield this today' idea? 

I was not asking about updates to ICP-2. I was specifically asking for your greenfield idea, in an attempt to work backwards and understand your concerns and perspective. 

It's clear you aren't interested in actual debate and discussion , but would prefer to just stomp and yell. I'll stop polluting everyone else's inboxes trying to sort through that. 

Take care. 

On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 6:01 AM William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 4:26 PM Tom Beecher <beecher@beecher.cc> wrote:
> It sounds to me then that you don't really have much of an
> issue with the RIR system generally then, but your concerns
> are more centered on one specific RIR.

Sorry, no. The question was about guiding principles for an updated
ICP between the RIRs. That's what I responded to: improvements to that
document not "concerns" about individual RIRs.

You also requested a tangent about detail-level changes I might make
to the RIRs themselves, so I offered some ideas born from my direct
experience. Sorry that confused you.

Regards,
Bill Herrin

--
William Herrin
bill@herrin.us
https://bill.herrin.us/