[AFRINIC-rpd] policy amendment proposal

[Guy Antony Halse]

Hi

On Wed 2012-09-19 (08:03), David Conrad wrote:
> I understand the concern -- if you have an unresponsive TLD administrative
> contact, the technical contact can have difficulty getting IANA to move
> forward on requests.

In the example I was referring to, the problem was a completely unresponsive
CCTLD (both admin & technical contact) that we happened to secondary for. 
They effectively stalled a perfectly rational change for a different CCTLD,
one that had responsive admin and technical contacts (me being the technical ;).

There are (have been?) a number of dysfunctional CCTLDs within AfriNIC's
region.  Thus this:

> However, I'm not sure allocating scarce resources is (should be)
> justification for getting around non-responsive TLD administrative contacts.

might be a necessary evil in this region.  I'll agree that it shouldn't be,
and that the ideal would be functional CCTLDs.

However, I also think we need to be aware that this isn't currently a
reality, and that writing policy based on a perceived ideal may ultimately
hurt those who're trying to keep things working.  In my opinion AfriNIC
should be giving every assistance possible in this situation, even if that
means allocating some scarce resources.

In all likelihood the number of situations this applies to is small.

> I'm not sure I see the justification for SLDs -- presumably the problems
> you mention above would not apply to SLD management.  Since it is (should

Unfortunately I can name CCTLDs where it does.  However, it is likely a
smaller problem that's easier to mitigate.  I don't feel strongly about
this; I was merely offering a suggestion for a less subjective definition.

- Guy
-- 
Manager: Systems, IT Division, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa
Email: G.Halse at ru.ac.za   Web: http://mombe.org/   IRC: rm-rf at irc.atrum.org
*** ANSI Standard Disclaimer ***                                    J.A.P.H