Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[AfriNIC-rpd] About the policy BOF

Fri May 4 17:10:13 UTC 2007

Hi Alain,

I think you're missing a very important point.

The consensus not only depends on the list. It may happen that you don't
find consensus in the list because a few objections, but later on, the
presentation in a face to face meetings achieve that consensus. Of course,
it may be also in the other way around.

That's why there is also a last call period in the list, as already was
indicated to you yesterday in the meeting.

Measuring the consensus is already a very difficult task (a bit subjective
and in that sense dangerous in my opinion), but in addition to that, part of
the problem here is that there is not a set of "co-chairs" or something
equivalent that can as much objectively as possible, determine the consensus
in this region.

When there is a very clear and overloading "majority" of people in favor of
against a proposal, even if consensus doesn't mean exactly majority, it
becomes easy to do this task and anyone in the room can just count the
"general proportion" of people in favor or against. But this is not going to
be the same way in all our policy proposals, and that's why I'm calling for
a system similar to the one existing in the rest of the regions.


> De: Alain Patrick AINA <aalain at>
> Organización: technologies réseaux et Solutions (
> Responder a: <aalain at>, AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion List
> <rpd at>
> Fecha: Fri, 4 May 2007 11:44:15 +0000
> Para: AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion List <rpd at>
> Asunto: Re: [AfriNIC-rpd] About the policy BOF
>> Thinks like what happened this morning should be avoided.
>> Nobody has the right to interrupt the process (and even less when the
>> actual chair has already asked to raise the hands in order to seek if there
>> is consensus or not): There is a time for discussion and if anyone raise
>> valid/funded concerns it is ok, but not vague things or wrong statements
>> about objecting because whatever not being correct in those statements but
>> is misleading the people in the room. It is a clear distortion of the
>> process and should not be allowed.
> the broken thing in the process yesterday was how the discussions was handled.
> The chair has said in his presentation of the policy what is the conclusion
> of his mail below
> "Conclusion
>> From the above discussions on the mailing list, it seems that at the
> moment there are more people against the current formulation of the
> proposed policy than those for."
> So the right step after jordi presentation should has been to try to reach
> consensus on the various issues raised on the mailing list.
> We definitely need to fix the PDP.
> Thanks AfriNIC for being proactive by calling the PDP BoF
> --alain
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at

The IPv6 Portal:

Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.

More information about the RPD mailing list