[rpd] Last Call for "AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT-04 - Internet Number Resources Review by AFRINIC"

[David Hilario]

On Jun 27, 2017 8:24 PM, "Omo Oaiya" <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> wrote:


On 27 Jun 2017, at 13:17, David Hilario <d.hilario at laruscloudservice.net>
wrote:

Hi Omo,

On Jun 27, 2017 7:35 PM, "Omo Oaiya" <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> wrote:


On 27 June 2017 at 11:56, Kris Seeburn <seeburn.k at gmail.com> wrote:

> I still stand opposed to the policy. People just call it an Andrew or
> liquid audit policy or a cloud innovations policy audit. Let’s not hide and
> get off with it.
>
> Kris
>


Are these people suggesting these organisations have something to hide?


With the recent increased scrutiny of this list, I would had hoped the
conversations to be more mature and less of accusative manners.

Remember that every time we participate on those lists, we all represent
the AFRINIC community, our words reflect on everyone.


David,

Perhaps you need to read what I was responding to again.  I make no
accusations and will ignore the reference to my maturity.

The question was for Kris to explain what he meant by "People just call it
an Andrew or liquid audit policy or a cloud innovations policy audit. Let’s
not hide and get off with it.”

I haven’t heard anyone call the policy anything else than the Internet
Number Resources Review policy or a variation.

As for the rest of your mail, I believe we are rehashing ground that has
been previously covered by the authors and will stop here.


Reharshing what ground?
The reasoning behind the opposition is the same, the proposal has not
changed.

The arguments stay valid, simply ignoring the arguments made against the
proposal does not make its flaws disappear.

I stated earlier and will again, that periodic reviews of ALL members is
highly encouraged and probably needed, but engaging conversation with
members while threatening them is not a viable solution.

I would love to see alternatives being offered in place of threats.

Forcefully recovering address space will serve no purpose other than
alienating whoever lost said resources.
Claim damages are warned about in the staff assessment, these are not made
up arguments against the policy from parties who feel threatened, but the
actual truth of the danger of such a policy if it was to be passed and ever
applied in a "totalitarian" manner by registration services.

So many things still need to be fixed in the proposal itself before it can
be acceptable.


Best wishes
Omo


Cordialement,
David Hilario
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20170627/bea376aa/attachment-0001.html>