Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] Implementation of transfer policy AFPUB-2016-V4-003

Noah noah at
Fri Sep 1 08:11:42 UTC 2017

On 1 Sep 2017 10:39 a.m., "Omo Oaiya" <Omo.Oaiya at> wrote:

On 31 Aug 2017, at 21:18, Noah <noah at> wrote:

> >> The RSA also has a clause that says "except in the event of The
> Applicant becoming the subject of merger and/or acquisition proceedings,
> the transfer of number resources is strictly prohibited”.   Even if there’s
> a policy that allows transfers, the RSA prohibits transfers, and the member
> has agreed to follow the RSA, so the member may not make a transfer.
> >
> > This is not valid if the RSA is subject to policies.   If policies say
> member can transfer, then policy overrides any provisions of the  RSA with
> regards to this aspect.
> “This agreement is subject to policies” means “policies can add additional
> restrictions”; it does not mean that policies can remove restrictions.

I am not sure I understood your statement above and disclaimer: 'as much as
am not a lawyer',  and others in the community could advice but "*subject
to*" means... conditional and being dependent upon something... see [1] [2]

Therefore IMHO, RSA is subject to policies and that would mean in this
case, subject to specifically the ratified policies only,  and for this
case the AFPUB-2016-V4-003 "IPv4 Resources transfer within the AFRINIC

So the modification and wording of the updated RSA, ref: transfers , should
be specific to this policy to avoid creating loopholes using the word
"transfer" as the only tranfers allowed per policy will be
Intra/within/inside Afrinic service region and nothing else.


The definitions of legal use of “subject to” you point at is what generally
obtains.  I am convinced Alan has misunderstood the legal adviser and that
we need him or other legal experts in the community to weigh in explicitly
on the meaning of this clause so we don’t go back and forth.

Currently, the "IPv4 Resources transfer within the AFRINIC Region” policy
is the exception to the prohibiting clause.   If an Inter-RIR policy were
to be passed, it would be yet another exception.   This is the point of the
current text as far as I understand it, so no change to the RSA is
necessary on this account.


Yes, the exception today is "IPv4 Resources transfer within thr Afrinic
Region" amd that is precisely what i was trying to point out without going
back and forth.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list