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

[rpd] FW: Opposition to the changes in the AfriNIC Soft Landing Policy

Andrew Alston Andrew.Alston at
Sun Dec 3 04:55:35 UTC 2017

On the contrary Badru,

They have chosen to send their thoughts to the RPD - they are following the process - and having their voice heard on the policy list.

What the pdp says is that thoughts should be heard on the list - or at the microphone - nowhere does it state that communication to the list cannot be formal - nowhere does it state it cannot be in a pdf - nowhere does it state that it cannot be signed.

The process is being followed - the communication is via the RPD list - and if this violates the process please can someone point to chapter and verse as to where in the process?  Once I have it I will go back to the larger block and explain to them that Afrinic’s process has decided to try and implement a policy that could damage their businesses and this industry while at the same time refusing to let them be heard on the issue - in the forum they were meant to be heard in - because they chose to do it via a signed letter rather than get abused on a list with vague statements of Neo-colonialism and such.

Be curious to see how that plays out


Get Outlook for iOS<>
From: Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at>
Sent: Sunday, December 3, 2017 6:56:04 AM
To: Andrew Alston
Cc: Alan Barrett; Afrinic RPD
Subject: Re: [rpd] FW: Opposition to the changes in the AfriNIC Soft Landing Policy

Since these are expressions and the authors have chosen to use a channel out of the RPD then other members could see it as noise.
Appreciate and note the expressions however continue with information and discussion in the RPD.

Let’s not innovate creative channels.  There processes to introduce change if members wish to introduce petitions.


Sent from my iPhone

On 3 Dec 2017, at 03:24, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at<mailto:Andrew.Alston at>> wrote:

There is nothing that *requires* it – there is also nothing that forbids it.

There was a discussion in various forums about how to handle this – and various ISP’s have opted to rather sign the petition document and have to forwarded to the list by a single individual – they wish to partake but do not wish to put up with the noise on this list, so, they are choosing to express their views in their own way.

Since each of them is a paying member, and each of them is impacted by policy, I believe they should be free to express their views in any way they wish, and if that is by signing a petition document and having someone else send it through to the list, I hardly see a reason to stop it.



From: Alan Barrett [mailto:alan.barrett at]
Sent: 02 December 2017 11:37
To: Afrinic RPD <rpd at<mailto:rpd at>>
Subject: Re: [rpd] FW: Opposition to the changes in the AfriNIC Soft Landing Policy

> On 1 Dec 2017, at 15:45, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at<mailto:Andrew.Alston at>> wrote:
> Please see attached.
> By agreement I will be sending these signed documents through as they come in from the various parties.

I don’t know what agreement you mean.

I am not aware of anything in the policy development process or the appeal process that requires signed documents similar to those I have seen in the past day or so. If people have objections to a policy proposal, I would suggest that they follow the existing process and make their comments in the RPD mailing list.

Alan Barrett

RPD mailing list
RPD at<mailto:RPD at><>
RPD mailing list
RPD at<mailto:RPD at><>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list