[rpd] Proposal Update received: Internet Number Resources Review by AFRINIC

Sun Nov 20 11:47:16 UTC 2016

Hi again,

For completeness, I thought I should add rationale for the suggested
changes:

1. A policy should NOT be to directly name and shame but to encourage and
ensure usage of allocated resources based on initial needs.

2. There are years when report may not be applicable simply because no
review was required/necessary.

3. Anyone blowing whistle must do so based on log of proof for certain
period of time i.e the whistle blower must have done significant homework
in order to better utilise staff resource.

4. It's important to ensure privacy of members (both the accused and the
accuser) so this doesn't turn to a hunting game.

Regards
PS: All/any comments from me are personal unless otherwise stated.

Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On 20 Nov 2016 09:33, "Seun Ojedeji" <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> May I suggest rewording of section 3.3.3b and 3.6 to the following:
>
> 3.3.3b:
>
> ....Complaints shall be backed by evidence, such evidence must have a
> consistency duration of at least 3months and AFRINIC staff...."
>
> 3.6 Compliance Report
>
> As applicable, AFRINIC shall publish a summary of total number of unit
> address (or an approximate prefix) reviewed and their level of compliance.
>
> Sent from my LG G4
> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>
> On 19 Nov 2016 22:09, "Dewole Ajao" <dewole at forum.org.ng> wrote:
>
>> Dear PDWG members,
>>
>> This is to inform you that authors of the policy proposal named "Internet
>> Number Resources Review by AFRINIC" have submitted an updated version as
>> displayed below. PDWG section of AFRINIC website will be updated in due
>> course.
>>
>> Thank you.
>> PDWG Co-Chairs
>>
>>
>> ------------------------[Proposal Header]-----------------------
>>
>> Unique identifier: AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT03
>>
>>
>> Draft Policy Name: Internet Number Resources Review by AFRINIC
>> Author(s)
>>      (a) Arnaud A. A. AMELINA | arnaud.amelina at auf.org | AUT.TogoRER
>>      (b) Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA | sergekbk at gmail.com | Vodacom Congo SA
>>      (c) Jean-Baptiste MILLOGO | jbmillogo at gmail.com | Airtel Burkina
>>      (d) DAHMANI ZAAFOURI Wafa | wafa at ati.tn | ATI
>>
>> Draft Policy
>>
>> Submission Date : 19 Nov. 2016
>>
>> Related Policies (where applicable)
>> Obsoletes : None
>> Amends : None
>>
>> ------------------------[Proposal Header]-----------------------
>>
>>
>> 1. As Internet Number resources are finite, their allocation is based on
>> the operational needs of end-users and Internet Services Providers, while
>> avoiding stockpiling in accordance with RFC7020, IPv4 Allocation Policy CPM
>> 5.5, IPv6 Allocation and assignment policy CPM 6.5 and Policy for
>> Autonomous System Numbers (ASN) Management in the AFRINIC region CPM 7.0.
>>
>> Section 4 of the Registration Service Agreement (RSA) provides the
>> framework for investigations of the usage of allocated Internet Number
>> resources, defines members’ obligation to cooperate and the measures to be
>> taken by AFRINIC in case of failure to comply.
>>
>> The lack of such investigation or regular control can lead to inefficient
>> usage of the Internet Number resources, to stockpiling and other type of
>> abuses.
>>
>>
>> 2.0 Summary of How this Proposal Addresses the Problem
>>
>> In order to ensure efficient and appropriate use of resources, AFRINIC
>> shall conduct regular reviews of resource utilization held by its members.
>> This would allow recovery of any type of resource, where usage is not in
>> compliance with the RSA. Those resources can be reallocated for better
>> usage.
>>
>>
>> 3.0 Proposal
>>
>> 3.1 The reviews shall be based on compliance with the terms outlined in
>> the RSA and Allocation/Assignment Policies.
>>
>>
>> 3.2 The reviews cover all allocated/Assigned resources, but priority goes
>> to IPv4 and ASN mappable to two-octet ASN.
>>
>>
>> 3.3 Classes of review: Members to be reviewed shall be selected according
>> to the following classes:
>>
>> 3.3.1 Random: The member is chosen by AFRINIC at random between members
>> of the following categories:
>>
>>     - Medium and above
>>     - IPv6-only Large
>>     - EU-AS
>>
>> 3.3.2 Selected:
>>
>> A member is selected because of an internal report or due to a lack of
>> contact between the AFRINIC and the member.
>>
>> 3.3.3 Reported: Here, members are reviewed either because:
>>
>>     a. They have requested the review themselves or
>>     b. There has been a community complaint made against them that
>> warrants investigation. Complaints shall be backed by evidence and AFRINIC
>> staff  shall evaluate the facts as appropriate to conduct the review.
>> However this review is not applicable to a member  with the same resources
>> portfolio on which a full review has been completed in the preceding 24
>> months.
>>
>>
>> 3.4 In case of non-compliance and if evidence has been established in
>> accordance with the non-exhaustive list below:
>>
>>     - Unjustified lack of visibility of the resource on the global
>> routing table.
>>     - Breach of AFRINIC policies.
>>     - Breach of the provisions of the registration service agreement or
>> other legal agreements between the organization holding the resource and
>> AFRINIC.
>>     - Evidence that an organisation is no more operating and its blocks
>> have not been transferred.
>>         - Unauthorized transfers of resources.
>>
>> AFRNIC shall initiate the resource recovery process.
>>
>> AFRINIC shall attempt to contact the organisation and correct any
>> discrepancy towards the RSA. If the situation cannot be rectified, AFRINIC
>> shall publish the resources to be recovered for a period of three (3)
>> months; during which the organisation may at any time, seek compliance.
>> After this period, the resource shall be recovered and therefore the
>> records of the previous holder of the recovered resource shall be removed
>> from AFRINIC’s databases.
>>
>> Any Internet Number Resources recovered under this policy may be
>> assigned/allocated under existing Allocation and Assignment Policies.
>>
>>
>> 3.5 Appeal procedure
>>
>> The review shall be conducted in full transparency and neutrality. But if
>> the result of the review does not appear to be fair, the reviewed members
>> has the right to appeal against the result. Appeals shall follow an
>> arbitration process as defined by AFRINIC, which shall publish the process
>> and the pool of arbitrators who shall be knowledgeable volunteers from the
>> community.
>>
>>
>> Outcome of the arbitration process are unequivocal
>>
>>
>> 3.6 Compliance Report
>>
>> AFRINIC shall publish an annual report describing the members which have
>> been reviewed and their level of compliance.
>>
>>
>> 3.7 Acknowledgement
>>
>> - The authors thank Mr. Alain AINA for his contribution in the
>> development of this Policy proposal.
>> - The authors also thank the community for the discussions and
>> contributions.
>>
>> 4.0 Revision History
>>
>> 18 May 2016 Version 1.0
>>
>> First Draft AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT01 Posted on RPD list
>>
>> 05 Aug 2016 Version 2.0
>>
>>     - Change on the policy’s name
>>     - Addition of the Acknowledgement section
>>     - Rephrasing of section 3.3.3
>>
>> 19 Nov 2016 Version 3.0
>>     - Update of section 3.3.3 from discussions on mailing list
>>     - Update of section 3.7 (Aknowledgement) to thank the community for
>> discussions and contributions
>>
>>
>> 5.0 References
>>
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7020
>> http://afrinic.net/en/services/rs/rsa
>> http://www.afrinic.net/library/policies/126-policy-ipv4-addr
>> ess-allocation-policies
>> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/policies/122-afpub-2013-v6-001
>> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/policies/124-afpub-2004-asn-001
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20161120/35f19119/attachment.html>