[AFRINIC-rpd] Commencement of the last call

[Badru Ntege]

Andrew 

did not comment on this part 

This policy does not require an institution to prove that it has infrastructure for the capacity is requesting.  All it requires is that you have students and asks us to assume that each student will have a laptop, pda, iPad, and i-anything that will need connectivity.    There is nothing stoping this institution now using the resources to set up a local for profit ISP, or even passing these resources to a third party that will take them off the continent.   Lets stop using this tactic to scare people into supporting the proposal.  


response to you point below

On Jun 26, 2013, at 9:53 AM, Andrew Alston <alston.networks at gmail.com> wrote:

> Sorry Badru, but your comment below is actually incorrect.
> 
> > if i wanted to take resources off the continent all i need to do now is to invest in a poor african HEI get the resources and then use them in my business abroad.  The policy opens the door we are claiming to close.
> 
> The policy is pretty clear on this:
> 
> HEIs will be classified as End Users under this policy, on provision of a duly authorized letter from the institution management stating that address space allocated will not be used outside of the campus/academic environment.

What authenticates a dully authorized letter ??    You are asking us here to exercise what i would call "Blind Trust"  on top of just counting the numbers of students without much consideration for availability of CPE.



> 
> End users do not have this option, the only time this would be the case is if the Universities were classified as LIR's and that is something we have been at pains to make sure is not the default case under this policy
> 
> Andrew
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> If people still have issues with these answers, we cannot address them without further articulation of the concerns.  Part of the consensus process is to build towards a common goal, and we have done our best to answer each query as it was raised, and if the answers were not satisfactory and did not adequately explain our position, we can do nothing more but wait for further questions which will allow us to further clarify the position.  This is the nature of consensus building.
>> 
>> Andrew
>> 
>> 
>> From: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
>> Date: Tuesday 25 June 2013 10:04 PM
>> To: Andrew Alston <alston.networks at gmail.com>
>> Cc: Maye Diop <mayediop at gmail.com>, Emile Milandou <emilemilan at gmail.com>, rpd <rpd at afrinic.net>
>> Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Commencement of the last call
>> 
>> The same should apply equally to statements of support.
>> 
>> Owen
>> 
>> On Jun 25, 2013, at 04:50 , Andrew Alston <alston.networks at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> If I may ask the following on the list, because this is part of what is required when determining consensus as per the IETF draft document on rough consensus.
>>> 
>>> If there are objections to the policy, if these can be clearly articulated with solid modelling, technical objections or financial objections, that are based on solid information and not hypotheticals, it would be hugely helpful.
>>> 
>>> This way,  should the policy not pass last call, we can then examine exactly what changes need to be made in order to make the policy more palatable.  However, this is impossible to do if the objections are based on hypotheticals with no basis in solid information or gut feelings, and by the IEFT draft document on consensus, objections that are considered when gauging consensus should be based in fact, since consensus is more than just a "majority" issue.
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> 
>>> Andrew
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Maye Diop <mayediop at gmail.com>
>>> Date: Tuesday 25 June 2013 1:41 PM
>>> To: Emile Milandou <emilemilan at gmail.com>
>>> Cc: rpd <rpd at afrinic.net>
>>> Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Commencement of the last call
>>> 
>>> Dear Colleagues,
>>> Thanks to Emile for this update.
>>> As the last call is open now, I would like to add my opposition to the policy about Academic IPv4 Allocation. 
>>> Best Regards,
>>> 
>>> 2013/6/25 Emile Milandou <emilemilan at gmail.com>
>>>> Dear Colleagues,
>>>> 
>>>> Following the face to face discussions in Lusaka, Zambia during
>>>> AFRINIC 18, the following proposals reached consensus during the
>>>> meeting.
>>>> 
>>>> Remove requirement to announce entire v6 block as single aggregate
>>>> Steven Wiesman, Steven Tapper,Charles Hendrikson
>>>> AFPUB-2013-V6-001-DRAFT01
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> No Reverse Unless Assigned
>>>> Tim McGinnis
>>>> AFPUB-2012-DNS-001-DRAFT-02
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Academic IPv4 Allocation
>>>> Andrew Alston, Sunday Folayan
>>>> AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-03
>>>> 
>>>> Anycast Assignments in the AFRINIC region
>>>> Mark Elkins, Mauritz Lewies, Tim McGinnis
>>>> AFPUB-2012-V4-001-DRAFT-01 
>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The two-week last call period for these proposals starts today 25-06-2013.
>>>> 
>>>> At the end of the Last Call, we will make a final assessment on whether consensus has been reached by taking into consideration the comments from the Public Policy Meeting as well as those during this Last Call period.
>>>> 
>>>> With Regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Emile Milandou, Seun Ojedeji
>>>> PDWG co-Chairs
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> rpd mailing list
>>>> rpd at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> ---------------------
>>> Mme Ndéye Maimouna DIOP
>>> Spécialiste ICT4D
>>> _______________________________________________ rpd mailing list rpd at afrinic.nethttps://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rpd mailing list
>>> rpd at afrinic.net
>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> rpd mailing list
>> rpd at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20130626/8e8ac766/attachment.html>