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

[rpd] Fwd: [IANAOversight] IANA Numbering Services SLA Draft Call for Comments

Nii Narku Quaynor quaynor at
Sun May 3 20:35:47 UTC 2015

> On May 3, 2015, at 17:42, Owen DeLong <owen at> wrote:
>> On May 2, 2015, at 14:02 , Nii Narku Quaynor <quaynor at> wrote:
>>>> On May 2, 2015, at 13:24, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 02 May 2015, Nii Narku Quaynor wrote:
>>>> Is there an accompanying SLA between Afrinic and LIRs to share?
>>> The relationship between Afrinic and LIRs is goverened by the
>>> registration service agreement <>..
>>> This agreement says that "AFRINIC shall provide the services applied for under the present agreement in terms of the "best effort" criterion".
>> Thanks. The import of the question was that while Afrinic on one hand ask SLA from ICANN on the other offers "best effort" service to LIRs which is not symmetric thus wondered if corresponding enhancement to RSA would be appropriate for members
> There is a huge difference between the relationship RIR<->IANA vs. RIR<->LIR, so I think attempting to seek symmetry in the contracts on that basis is probably ill-advised.

I note that even different objects may have some properties in common so these relationships IANA<->RIR and RIR<->LIR being different may be insufficient to conclude they don't have SLA as a common property

The issue in a steward-less multi-stakeholder environment is that we have to be more accountable to each other thus why not improve  the RIR accountability ? Is an SLA in RIR<->LIR relation such an issue? It's a good thing to have!

This shows a good list for accountability
so we need to review afrinic accountability and community engagement as well perhaps periodically 

In Afrinic, service level and dispute resolution have been discussed but inconclusively and may be additional important ingredients of accountability for all RIRs 

> Owen

More information about the RPD mailing list