<div dir="ltr"><div dir="auto"><a href="https://afrinic.net/policy/appeal-committee?lang=en#appeals" target="_blank">https://afrinic.net/policy/appeal-committee?lang=en#appeals</a><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, 1 Aug 2021, 22:46 Owen DeLong, <<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com" target="_blank">owen@delong.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><br><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Aug 1, 2021, at 12:21 , Noah <<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">noah@neo.co.tz</a>> wrote:</div><br><div><div dir="ltr" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none"><div dir="auto"><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, 1 Aug 2021, 20:47 Owen DeLong, <<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">owen@delong.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><br><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Aug 1, 2021, at 06:06 , Noah <<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">noah@neo.co.tz</a>> wrote:</div><br><div><div dir="auto"><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, 1 Aug 2021, 15:43 Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss, <<a href="mailto:community-discuss@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">community-discuss@afrinic.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div><div><div dir="ltr" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><br></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div><div><div dir="ltr" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">Let those who wish to run the risks of staying with AfriNIC through this situation do so</div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div><div><div dir="ltr" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">- let those who choose not to accept the risk profile transfer out - problem solved.</div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><a href="https://afrinic.net/policy/archive/inbound-transfer-policy" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://afrinic.net/policy/archive/inbound-transfer-policy</a> <br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Noah</div><div dir="auto">PS: confusion of the highest order.</div></div></div></blockquote></div><br><div>Who is confused, Noah?<span> </span></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:sans-serif">Andrew who penned down that failed Inbound Transfer Policy Proposal in 2016 and today was suggesting an Outbound transfer policy to move IPv4 space out of AFRINIC service region.  There is some confusion there.</span><br></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>I don’t think he’s confused, I think you fail to recognize a: the context in which he penned that 2016 proposal and b: the ways in which circumstances have changed today.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Circumstances require the AFRINIC service region to be more conservative. If anything, Andrew should bring back his proposal for Inbound Transfers. </div><div><br></div><div>In your case, you want to force through a resource transfer policy so that your employer Larus can transfer resources out.  <b>#dangayatoto </b></div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none"><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><div>Personally, I think the simpler and more expedient thing would be for the board to merely ratify</div><div>the existing consensus RTP,</div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Says Owen who recently on<span> </span><b>Thu Jul 29 01:22:17 UTC 2021</b><span> </span>cautioned the same AFRINIC board from ratifying a proposal under some appeal.</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Yes… Difference is that there’s arguably no valid appeal standing against RTP.</div><div><br></div><div>Co-chairs declared consensus.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>In an erroneous manner. </div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><div>Appeal submitted</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The submitted appeals against that proposal remain open pending hearing by an AC review.</div><div><br></div><div><div><a href="https://afrinic.net/policy/appeal-committee?lang=en#appeals" target="_blank">https://afrinic.net/policy/appeal-committee?lang=en#appeals</a><br></div><div><br></div></div><div><b>1st pending appeal against DPP </b>AFPUB-2019-V4-003-DRAFT04</div><div><a href="https://afrinic.net/ast/pdf/policy/appeal-consensus-ressource-transfer-policy-updated-20102020.pdf">https://afrinic.net/ast/pdf/policy/appeal-consensus-ressource-transfer-policy-updated-20102020.pdf</a><br></div><div><br></div><div><b>2nd pending appeal against DPP </b>AFPUB-2019-V4-003-DRAFT04</div><div><a href="https://afrinic.net/ast/pdf/policy/afrinic-appeal-resource-transfer-policy.pdf">https://afrinic.net/ast/pdf/policy/afrinic-appeal-resource-transfer-policy.pdf</a><br></div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><div>Co-chairs returned proposal to list for further community input.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The PDP after the last call, requires disputed proposals to be sent back to the list for further discussions until the next PPM.  There was no emergency and the proposal had so many valid objections that remain unaddressed today.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><div>Consensus was confirmed by the community and again confirmed by co-chairs. </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Which community?  or mean your echo-chamber. </div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><div>Thus this consensus declaration was not the subject of the previous appeal.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I refer you to the above links that are pending appeals and can also see </div><div><br></div><div><a href="https://afrinic.net/policy/appeal-committee?lang=en#appeals" target="_blank">https://afrinic.net/policy/appeal-committee?lang=en#appeals</a></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><div>Proposal submitted to board fro ratification after second consensus call.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>You can twist it however you like but as long as the PDWG has disputed the ex Co-chairs decision as per the PDP process and the very proposal remains with valid objections yet to be addressed, the resource transfer proposal never reached consensus and is under appeals.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><div><br></div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none"><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><br></div><div>I refer you to the archives <span> </span><b><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/013651.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/013651.html</a></b></div><div><br></div><div><span style="font-family:Times;font-size:inherit"><b>Jordi</b><span> </span>></span><i style="font-family:Times;font-size:inherit"> I’ve submitted several appeals, so I know very well that only patience is needed.</i><span style="font-family:Times;font-size:inherit"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family:Times;font-size:inherit"><b>Owen</b>: I would think you, of all people, would understand the need </span><span style="font-family:Times;font-size:inherit">for the board to at least acknowledge the appeal and provide some assurance that it will not ratify a </span><span style="font-family:Times;font-size:inherit">policy that should be under appeal.</span></div><div><br style="font-family:Times;font-size:inherit"><span style="font-family:Times;font-size:inherit"><b>Jordi</b><span> </span>></span><i style="font-family:Times;font-size:inherit"> The Board will not be able to ratify a policy under appeal until the appeal is resolved. That’s it.</i><span style="font-family:Times;font-size:inherit"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family:Times;font-size:inherit"><b>Owen</b>: Normally, I would agree with you. However, in the face of recent events, I am unwilling to place so much faith in</span><br style="font-family:Times;font-size:inherit"><span style="font-family:Times;font-size:inherit">this current board.</span><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div>Is it safe to say that you Owen is equally confused.</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Nope… But apparently I was right about you being confused. You seem to fail to grasp the difference in circumstance for the two policies you mention above.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>You really like to twist things around to suit your liking. You are calling for the <b>ratification</b> of a resource transfer proposal which is under two pending appeals and at the same time you are calling for the <b>non-ratification</b> of an RPKI AS0 proposal which is under some appeal. </div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none"><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><div>but Andrew’s suggestion could also mitigate risks for members.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It remains Andrew's personal opinion and not the consensus of 75% of the membership base. </div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>How did you measure this 75%’s opinions? Please do tell.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>If you didn't get it,... it's immaterial.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Noah</div></div></div>
</div>