Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Report of the Soft Landing isuue
Honest Ornella GANKPA
honest1989 at gmail.com
Sun Mar 26 11:45:44 UTC 2017
>From my point of view, I don’t see anything sad about it. I see progress
and an opportunity to improve our PDP process.
The Co-Chairs have done a good job of presenting the main points of the
discussions we had. Why not contribute or comment on that as requested?
One lesson I learned from this is that we should try not to have 2
proposals dealing with the same issue in the PDP. What we should do is work
as a community to improve or reject proposals that are submitted.
Another proposal from you does not make sense to me especially as your team
refused to cooperate with the Co-chairs. As far as I understand, because
you withdrew your policy, softlanding-bis is currently the policy under
We can react to the feedback at https://goo.gl/AWCCWd and update the
policy. If there are no constraints, we could even do this without the
authors, have the Co-chairs act as editors and make this a real community
What we must not do is waste even more of everyone's time and Co-chairs
effort in getting us to this point.
Honest Ornella GANKPA
2017-03-24 21:46 GMT+01:00 Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za>:
> That's a bit sad.
> I've been involved in a number of proposals, both some successful (IPv6
> /48, AnyCast) and some not (Inter-regional Transfer - which I withdrew). I
> believe that there is a need to re-address some parts of the Soft Landing
> Proposal and I'm thick-skinned enough to give this a try.
> I believe that proposals since the Soft landing proposal was first
> proposed (and that wasn't a quick task) along with what has been learned by
> watching other regions and by some of our own proposals will allow our
> community to better shape the Soft Landing Proposal to something that will
> allow some limited but crucial IPv4 resources to last a fare bit longer
> into the future for new entrants into this world of Internet Addresses.
> On 24/03/2017 22:08, Arsène Tungali wrote:
> Hi everyone.
> Though we still have 3 days to go (out of the 7 suggested by the Co-chairs
> to hear from the community on their suggestion),
> As a newbie in the PDP process, I have the impression that we (community)
> will not be able to move ahead with this work as per the wonderful
> suggestion by co-chairs. If this wonderful idea was supported by the
> community, there should have been someone to take the lead (already).
> In my opinion, since no one from the community has stepped in to work on a
> merged policy, I would suggest co-chairs to just leave this and declare it
> a dead proposal. There is no interest in working on a merged proposal given
> that original authors were not able to come together and produce something
> as we all agreed in Mauritius. This is frustrating and I hope we take
> lessons from this experience for the future.
> **Arsène Tungali**
> Co-Founder & Executive Director, *Rudi international
> CEO,* Smart Services Sarl <http://www.smart-serv.info>*, *Mabingwa Forum
> Tel: +243 993810967
> GPG: 523644A0
> *Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo*
> 2015 Mandela Washington Felllow
> (YALI) - ISOC Ambassador (IGF Brazil
> & Mexico
> - AFRISIG 2016 <http://afrisig.org/afrisig-2016/class-of-2016/> - Blogger
> <http://tungali.blogspot.com> - ICANN Fellow (Los Angeles
> <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-07-18-en> & Marrakech
> ). AFRINIC Fellow (Mauritius
> )* - *IGFSA Member <http://www.igfsa.org/> - Internet Governance -
> Internet Freedom.
> Check the 2016 State of Internet Freedom in DRC report
> 2017-03-22 22:09 GMT+02:00 ALAIN AINA <aalain at trstech.net>:
>> Dear Community
>> We thank the co-chairs for the efforts put in managing the soft landing
>> update’s process incepted by the 2 policy proposals. We also thank the
>> community for the intensive discussions and contributions.
>> We have contributed to the post-Mauritius initiative from the co-chairs
>> on this update to the softlanding and remain available for any further
>> actions required from us.
>> We still believe that amending certain aspects of the current soft
>> landing policy adopted in 2011, is a good thing to do, despite the time
>> wasted and the fact that AFRINIC v4 pool showing 1.077 /8 available,
>> which means the soft landing may be triggered anytime soon.
>> We hope that the community has learnt a lot from this process and
>> consider the main lesson here to be, the fundamental principle of
>> policies/standards' development, which is that when a proposal is on the
>> table to address an issue and has been accepted for discussion, it becomes
>> community's document, aiming to be improved by the community up to
>> adoption, rejection or withdrawal.
>> Softlanding-bis Co-authors
>> > On Mar 20, 2017, at 10:24 PM, SamiSalih <sami at ntc.gov.sd> wrote:
>> > Dear AfriNIC Community,
>> > Greetings from the PDWG Co-chairs,
>> > Many of you may have followed the proceedings of the two conflicting
>> proposals addressing IPv4 exhaustion.
>> > At the last meeting in Mauritius, authors of both IPv4 run-out
>> management proposals agreed to consider working together to develop an
>> improved proposal.
>> > We regret to inform you that despite several efforts, both groups of
>> authors were unable to collaborate towards a joint solution.
>> > As that process is deadlocked, the co-chairs have put together some of
>> the major points in discussions raised over multiple meetings and mailing
>> list discussions. Because the community has made many valid observations on
>> improvements that could be made to the status quo, we hereby suggest that
>> these be assessed by the community with a view to presenting a proposal
>> that better manages the exhaustion of IPv4 resources.
>> > Some examples of recommended improvements include consideration for new
>> entrants, IPv6 transition provisions, and repurposing of reserves for the
>> > To avoid entering a loop similar to what we recently encountered, there
>> is a need to concentrate our efforts on a joint solution. Can we discuss
>> and let the co-chairs assist with the draft of a proposal that contains
>> only areas that have rough consensus?
>> > If there are areas on which consensus cannot be reasonably reached,
>> those can be left out of the policy update proposal. Although the resulting
>> proposal may be treated under the emergency provisions of the PDP due to
>> time sensitivity of the subject matter, the ideal situation would be for
>> the draft update to be received before the next PPM.
>> > Although the PDP does not expressly require the above, we trust that
>> all community members will be reasonable and work together constructively
>> rather than seek to frustrate any efforts that do not align with their
>> > The extracts from discussions till date are at https://goo.gl/AWCCWd
>> and we would like to receive feedback and suggestions from the community
>> > over the next 7 days.
>> > Regards,
>> > AfiNIC PDP Co-chairs
>> > 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
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > RPD mailing list
>> > RPD at afrinic.net
>> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
> RPD mailing listRPD at afrinic.nethttps://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
> Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africamje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 <+27%2012%20807%200590> Cell: +27.826010496 <+27%2082%20601%200496>
> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD