[rpd] RPD appeal committee

Tue Jul 11 13:06:57 UTC 2017

Hi Board,

Under section 3.5 of the CPM the board is mandated to have appointed an appeal committee to appeal the decision of the chairs should a member of the community disagree with said decision.

Please can the board - as a matter of urgency - inform this community who sits on the appeal committee - who chairs it - and where appeals can be directed to.

Thanks

Andrew

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 3:45:28 PM
To: Omo Oaiya; Owen DeLong
Cc: AfriNIC RPD MList.
Subject: Re: [rpd] Last Call for "AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT-04 - Internet Number Resources Review by AFRINIC"

Omo,

Need a remind you, rough consensus is achieved when all issued have been addressed but not necessarily accommodated.

So, let us look at this – firstly the legal advisor is explicitly stating in his letter to this community that the issued have not be addressed.

Secondly, even if each and every issued had been addressed and not accommodated – we then get into the issue of board fiduciary duty.  The legal advisor to the company has advised publicly that this policy creates substantial legal risk to the company.  At that point, even if the policy passed consensus on this list – with a warning like that, it could very easily be argued that the board has a fiduciary duty to decline to ratify this.

So – one of two things
a.) either we discount the legal advisor stating the issued have not been addressed – in which consensus has not been reached and the policy should be returned for further edits or withdrawn as per the PDP or
b.) we consider that the issued have been addressed yet not accommodated – in which case I would argue the board has a legal obligation to decline to ratify the policy on the grounds of risk to the company as stated by the legal advisor.  In this scenario – continuing with this process seems pointless since the policy can’t ever actually make it into fruition.

Furthermore, I point to my email in response to Ashok – and what the current RSA says – and I would STRONGLY argue that binding a company to this policy in its current form is in the detriment of the company, which means that a modification to the RSA almost certainly has to be *agreed* by the contracting parties, both AfriNIC and the individual member (it cannot be done collectively, since, as Ashok said, the RSA is between AfriNIC and a member and is a two party contract).  Right now – if faced with an RSA that bound me to a policy such as this one – I can tell you I would fight very hard against agreeing to it.

Then there is another issue – by forcing any entity to be bound by a policy like this – while denying said entity the right to go elsewhere with their resources – you could well open another can of worms – but that can of worms – I will address on another day in another email, those who know to what I refer are free to elaborate further if they choose.

Andrew

From: Omo Oaiya [mailto:Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net]
Sent: 11 July 2017 11:27
To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
Cc: AfriNIC RPD MList. <rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [rpd] Last Call for "AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT-04 - Internet Number Resources Review by AFRINIC"

Owen,

The final legal feedback notwithstanding (which I am sure the authors will respond to), I only see negative feedback from a handful of people.  The fact that this is voiced repeatedly does not in any way increase the volume.

It is your misinterpretation that is more likely to be confusing to the community.  Resource review is essential activity for Internet registries even if they are only bookkeepers like some would have them be.

AFRINIC would be failing in its accountability to the community without a policy like this.   Please let the Co-Chairs do their job

Omo

On 10 July 2017 at 23:18, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com<mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
Sami,

The final legal feedback notwithstanding, I think there has been more than enough negative feedback in this last call to make it quite clear that this policy does NOT have consensus at this time and I urge the co-chairs to remand it to the authors and the list for further refinement or abandonment rather than leaving it in last call status. There is no reason for last call to be maintained beyond the point where clearly the policy has no consensus as is and will need substantial revision. It only confuses the community.

Owen

> On Jul 10, 2017, at 12:55 , SamiSalih <sami at ntc.gov.sd<mailto:sami at ntc.gov.sd>> wrote:
>
>
> Dear Andrew and Community,
>
> As section (3.4.3) of the CPM stated the last call can't be less than two week, however the document didn't specify exact period for last call to be concluded.
>
> Please refer to the last Call section in the following link
> http://www.afrinic.net/library/policies/1829-afrinic-consolidated-policy-manual#PolicyDevelopmentProcess<http://www.afrinic.net/library/policies/1829-afrinic-consolidated-policy-manual#PolicyDevelopmentProcess>
>
> The Co-chair are evaluating feedbacks specially those related to the legal issues in the policy and as you know we just received the final assessment of the legal advisor today.
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
>
> Dr. Sami Salih  | Assistant Professor
> Sudan University of Science and Technology
> Eastern Dum, P.O Box 11111-407
> email: sami.salih at sustech.edu<mailto:sami.salih at sustech.edu>
> Mob: +249122045707<tel:%2B249122045707>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com<mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>>
>> To: rpd at afrinic.net<mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>
>> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 9:53:22 PM
>> Subject: Re: [rpd] Last Call for "AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT-04 - Internet Number Resources Review by AFRINIC"
>>
>> By the way, as a question to the RPD co-chairs.
>>
>> Standard process is that last call is a 2 week period.  By my count, last
>> call has now been open longer than that on this policy - can we get can
>> indication from the co-chairs as to when consensus or lack thereof will be
>> declared for this last call period please.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ashok Radhakissoon [mailto:ashok at afrinic.net<mailto:ashok at afrinic.net>]
>> Sent: 10 July 2017 14:07
>> To: rpd at afrinic.net<mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>
>> Subject: [rpd] Last Call for "AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT-04 - Internet Number
>> Resources Review by AFRINIC"
>>
>> Dear All,
>> Find for your consideration my final assessment of the proposed policy under
>> reference.
>> Regards
>> Ashok.B.Radhakissoon
>> Legal Adviser
>> AFRINIC
>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net<mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net<mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>

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

--
Omo Oaiya
CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN
Mobile: +234 808 888 1571<tel:0808%20888%201571> , +221 784 305 224
Skype: kodion
http://www.wacren.net<http://www.wacren.net>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20170711/f538287e/attachment.html>