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

Wed Jul 12 06:14:28 UTC 2017

On 12 July 2017 at 08:08, Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> wrote:
> On 11 July 2017 at 13:38, David Hilario <d.hilario at laruscloudservice.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Omo,
>>
>> On 11 July 2017 at 11:27, Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>> Volume is irrelevant in the policy making, even a single voice from a
>> totally unknown person can block anything, as long as that person has
>> a valid and sustained.
>>
>
> Valid is the keyword here
>

I am glad we can agree on that one.

>>
>> Almost none of the arguments put forward against the policy were new,
>> they had just been slipped under the radar or were just being ignored.
>
>
> Ignored by the entire community?  the Co-Chairs?
>

I didn't see the entire community ignoring it, quite the contrary,
when they realised the proposal was actually in last call a lot woke
up and voiced, again, the same opposition they had already voiced.

A sub-section of the community is deaf to those comments and
objections in regards to the potential consequences of the proposal
and paradoxically very vocal in stating those comments and objections
should be ignored, therefore never addressed.

Ultimately it is neither for me or you to decide what is valid but for
the co-chairs to decide, based on the comments made here on the list.

I believe that the folks who had opposition to this proposal didn't
realise until consensus was called in Kenya that the policy was
actually going forward.
The last Staff comments was a list, it was one of the biggest I have ever seen.
I could not even fathom this proposal going forward while there were
still so many open questions and unaddressed oppositions from various
community members, but all these early objections had been buried in
the conversation thread...and ultimately ignored.

But, the "volume" that you referred to originally means nothing,
neither in support or opposition, one single valid and sustained
opposition is enough for a policy to have to be dropped or returned to
the drawing board, even if you have 1000 in support, one single voice,
must be listened to and taken in consideration, THAT is the principle
of the consensus and bottom up approached.

No one should not try to silence or bully away contribution that they
do not like, we should listen.
On the lists and especially when it comes to policy, everybody is
equal, only the chairs have a "different" status due to their role,
which also limits them and gives them less rights as they should not
personally participate in the discussion.

>>
>> > 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.
>>
>> All RIRs do reviews, but none of them are aimed solely at
>> de-registering,
>
>
> Policy says AfriNIC will only claim as last resort and would work with the
> reviewed party to reach compliance.  The undue focus on deregistration is
> what is worrying.
>
>
>> Ashok's email actually goes into quite some length
>> into that topic.
>
>
> No.  It doesn't.  Happy for you to correct me and quote which part says
> this.

Copy/paste from Ashok's document:
>"As I have expressly highlighted earlier, the proposal places AFRINIC in a position where it will, in certain circumstances, after a full review, have to recall resources from members who would fail the review process.( this is avowedly one of the objectives of the proposal)"

The part between parenthesis there cannot be ignored.

Some more Copy/paste from Ashok's document:
>"You seem to confuse two important elements here. The information being sought under an RSA is for allocation/ assignment of resources and it is for the applicant to shoulder the burden of submitting such information which can be tested by AFRINIC.

If the status of the information is not good enough to satisfy
AFRINIC, the application is not granted. AFRINIC does not bear any
liability as the applicant is the sole party responsible for this.

On the contrary, the information which third parties will submit to
AFRINIC is going to be the basis for the recall of such resources
which have been allocated/assigned already.

 The “reviewed member” will be deprived of such resources on the basis
of which it runs its business. If such information reveals itself to
be insufficient, lacking, forged or false, the “reviewed member” will
sue AFRINIC for prejudices suffered and not the “ whistleblower”.

I shall go further and require of the latter a written undertaking to
the effect that it would compensate AFRINIC for any sum that the
latter will pay to the “ reviewed member” if it was to win its case
against AFRINIC."

>>
>>
>> > AFRINIC would be failing in its accountability to the community without
>> > a
>> > policy like this.   Please let the Co-Chairs do their job
>>
>> This would imply that AFRINIC as the secretariat would have been
>> failing the community up until this point!
>> Which is simply not true.
>
>
> We should want to improve Afrinic.   It is the only RIR without a review
> policy.
>

Those are very misleading comments.

1.
Almost everyone who had an objection also has expressed support of a
review process.

No one is really against the idea of a regular ongoing review policy
of the members, re-evaluation of their resources with a threat of
de-registration, should not and must not be part of such policy.

2.
Since we again get to hear that this is what the "others are doing",
no it simply isn't true, but yes wwe can learn from the others.
The review/audit policy of ARIN and RIPE NCC are very different in
their intent to the one that was proposed here, this has been
mentioned time and time again.

ARIN or RIPE NCC do not perform regular review with the intent of
recovering resources, neither do they re-evaluate an LIRs allocation
during that process, this is not what this RIR should do either.

>>
>>
>> > Omo
>> >
>> > On 10 July 2017 at 23:18, Owen DeLong <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> 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
>> >> >
>> >> > 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
>> >> > Mob: +249122045707
>> >> >
>> >> > ----- Original Message -----
>> >> >> From: "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
>> >> >> To: 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]
>> >> >> Sent: 10 July 2017 14:07
>> >> >> To: 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
>> >> >> 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
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Omo Oaiya
>> > CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN
>> > Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 , +221 784 305 224
>> > Skype: kodion
>> > http://www.wacren.net
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > RPD mailing list
>> > RPD at afrinic.net
>> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>
>> David Hilario
>>
>> IP Manager
>>
>> Larus Cloud Service Limited
>>
>> p: +852 29888918  m: +359 89 764 1784
>> f: +852 29888068
>> a: Flat B5, 11/F, TML Tower, No.3 Hoi Shing Road, Tsuen Wan, HKSAR
>> w: laruscloudservice.net
>> e: d.hilario at laruscloudservice.net
>
>
>
>
> --
> Omo Oaiya
> CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN
> Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 , +221 784 305 224
> Skype: kodion
> http://www.wacren.net
>

David Hilario

IP Manager

Larus Cloud Service Limited

p: +852 29888918  m: +359 89 764 1784
f: +852 29888068
a: Flat B5, 11/F, TML Tower, No.3 Hoi Shing Road, Tsuen Wan, HKSAR
w: laruscloudservice.net
e: d.hilario at outsideheaven.com