Search RPD Archives
[AfriNIC-rpd] Call for Comments: Draft Minutes of Public Policy Meeting during AfriNIC-15 in Yaounde
dogwallah at gmail.com
Tue Jan 10 12:30:58 UTC 2012
Comments inline as usual:
On 1/7/12, SM <sm at resistor.net> wrote:
> As the Policy Development Working Group Chairs
> held a public policy meeting in Yaounde, could they please explain:
> (i) Why the agenda for the meeting was not announced on Resource Policy
> Discussion mailing list?
This is surprising, as the Agenda was worked on extensively before the
I had thought it was posted to the list and on the AfriNIC-15 website.
Apologies for not ensuring this was done.
> (ii) Why the minutes of proceedings is being published after six weeks?
We only had the Minutes produced ~1 week ago. Reading the PDP again,
it does stipulate that minutes should be produced in 3 weeks time
after the meeting.
The minutes are produced by AfriNIC staff and then circulated to the
review. In any case, apologies for this oversight, it was not intentional.
>>The functions of the Policy Development Working Group and WG Chairs
>>were also explained. The process involved in policy development was then
>>further detailed, from initial submission of a proposal, provision of
>>relevant analyses by AfriNIC staff, mailing list discussion procedures
>>as well as conflict resolution and appeal mechanisms. Paulos concluded
>>by stating that there is a need for an urgent review of the PDP.
> Where can I find the review of the PDP mentioned above?
Well the 'relevant analysis' is at
but there has been no "review", as the general feeling at the meeting
was that a charter or guidelines for the co-chairs would be adequate.
>>[2.0] Staff Analysis of the AfriNIC PDP and Outstanding Issues for Full
>>Issue #2: The Policy does not spell out the mechanism for replacing an
> Did the staff really mean "unable to do or achieve" co-chair here?
I don't know, but it seems that "incapable" is pretty clear to me
>>Issue #3: The policy only states it is the Appeals committee that
>>resolves conflicts nothing more is specified
>> (i) The complainant shall send their appeal in the form of an email
>>to policy-submission at afrinic.net The email must mention the names and
>>email addresses of three (3) persons who support it.
> I suggest sending the appeal to this mailing list.
Wouldn't both email addresses be appropriate?
>>Adiel Akplogan commenting on the relative weights of mailing list and
>>face-to-face meeting comments said that only comments on the RPD mailing
>>list made before the face-to-face meeting should only be equal to those
>>at face-to-face meetings.
> The sentence is not clear. I suggest asking Mr
> Adiel Akplogan whether the sentence reflects what he said.
I will leave it to him to comment.
>>(b) Transfer of IPv4 Space to any Entity
>>The PDP MG co-chairs presented the proposal as written in absence of the
> There is a typo (PDP MG) in the above.
There is indeed, good catch!
> BTW, the draft minutes does not mention that
> remote participation was not possible during
> parts of the meeting. I suggest adding a note about that.
I wouldn't think this significant enough to be minuted.
More information about the RPD