[rpd] Last Call for "AFPUB-2016-V4-003-DRAFT03"

[SamiSalih]

Dear Nishal, 

I hope the legal advisor ack on revising the RSA if the community endorse this new policy in the last call period 

BR 

Dr. Sami Salih | Assistant Professor 
Sudan University of Science and Technology 
Eastern Dum, P.O Box 11111-407 
email: sami.salih at sustech.edu 
Mob: +249122045707 

----- Original Message -----

> From: "Ashok Radhakissoon" <ashok at afrinic.net>
> To: "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com>, "Nishal Goburdhan"
> <nishal at controlfreak.co.za>
> Cc: "rpd" <rpd at afrinic.net>
> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 11:08:25 AM
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Last Call for "AFPUB-2016-V4-003-DRAFT03"

> Dear All,
> I wish you all a very happy new year 2017.
> I agree with Owen.
> Ashok.

> On 06/01/2017 03:09, Owen DeLong wrote:

> > To my thinking, this is an absurd argument/waste of time/red herring.
> 

> > If the community chooses to implement a transfer policy, then I’m sure
> > staff
> > will amend the RSA as needed to facilitate the process.
> 

> > If you are opposed to transfers, then just come out and oppose the policy
> > on
> > that basis.
> 

> > Arguing that the policy can’t be implemented because the RSA stands in the
> > way as if the RSA were some immutable document carved in stone is absurd. I
> > suspect the RSA has been amended in the past and that it will likely be
> > amended in the future.
> 

> > Owen
> 

> > > On Jan 4, 2017, at 00:32 , Nishal Goburdhan <nishal at controlfreak.co.za>
> > > wrote:
> > 
> 

> > > > On 29 Dec 2016, at 16:27, SamiSalih <sami at ntc.gov.sd> wrote:
> > > 
> > 
> 

> > > > Sorry,
> > > 
> > 
> 
> > > > the correct link is
> > > > http://afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development/policy-proposals/1969-ipv4-resources-transfer-within-the-afrinic-region
> > > 
> > 
> 

> > > hi sami,
> > 
> 

> > > i asked this on the mailing list earlier [1], but it seems to have been
> > > missed during the policy discussion.
> > 
> 

> > > it’s still not clear to me under what circumstances a transfer can be
> > > permitted.
> > 
> 
> > > in reading the URL above (for what i guess is now the most up-to-date
> > > version
> > > of this policy), i see:
> > 
> 
> > > "5.7.2 IPv4 resources to be transferred must be from an existing AFRINIC
> > > member’s account or from a Legacy Resource Holder in the AFRINIC service
> > > region.”
> > 
> 
> > > "5.7.3.1 The source must be the current rightful holder of the IPv4
> > > address
> > > resources recognized by AFRINIC,”
> > 
> 

> > > i understand the part about legacy resource holder.  so that doesn’t need
> > > to
> > > be explained to me.
> > 
> 

> > > i *don’t* understand how an existing member can transfer resources
> > > though,
> > > especially if this was obtained from afrinic, since the RSA is quite
> > > clear,
> > > that any afrinic member is meant to surrender their resources back to
> > > afrinic if they are not in use.  from my original message:
> > 
> 
> > > "so i went to the RSA, and found under section 4.c.(iv):
> > 
> 
> > > “(iv) Hereby binds itself to:
> > 
> 
> > > (1) notify AFRINIC whenever its circumstances so change that it is no
> > > longer
> > > in need of the Internet number resources supplied or being  supplied to
> > > it
> > > under a Registration Service Agreement;
> > 
> 

> > > (2) surrender to AFRINIC within 15 days of the service of the notice at
> > 
> 
> > > (iv)(1) above the Internet number resources supplied or being supplied to
> > > it
> > > under a Registration Service Agreement; …”
> > 
> 

> > > IANAL, but that implies to me, that if you’re an afrinic member, with
> > > afrinic
> > > assigned (or allocated) space, and you’re trying to transfer this to
> > > another
> > > member, you’re in breach of the RSA, since you were meant to tell afrinic
> > > you didn’t need these, and should have returned the resources.  (mergers
> > > &
> > > acquisitions aside, of course!)”
> > 
> 

> > > i haven’t read the meeting transcript, so i want to believe that this was
> > > discussed at the face-to-face meeting, even though nothing was posted
> > > about
> > > this policy to the mailing list.  either way, i think that this should be
> > > been mentioned during the assessment for the casual RPD reader.  oh
> > > well..
> > 
> 
> > > i don’t think you could, or want to be, in a situation where policy and
> > > the
> > > RSA conflict (and i don’t want to guess at what is more correct) so i’d
> > > strongly suggest clearing up any discrepancies and points of conflict
> > > between this policy and the RSA, before moving ahead.  to me, this policy
> > > still propagates the idea that this rewards fraudulent use of existing
> > > afrinic resources :-(
> > 
> 

> > > —n.
> > 
> 

> > > [1] https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2016/006224.html
> > > _______________________________________________
> > 
> 
> > > RPD mailing list RPD at afrinic.net
> > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
> > 
> 

> > _______________________________________________
> 
> > RPD mailing list RPD at afrinic.net
> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
> 

> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170106/3ff2bb3e/attachment-0001.html>