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

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

Saul Stein saul at
Mon Dec 4 11:28:50 UTC 2017

Dear All,

I am seeing a large number or people who are against this policy. Far more 
than the 3 (if that) that have supported it. So I really do not see how and 
where the public consensus came from to pass this policy. The majority have 
spoken and are continuing to do so against this policy.

Most of us are unable to be professional meeting attenders and often can’t 
afford the hours to spend away from our days jobs to follow online. Thus 
mailing lists offer us the time to catch-up after hours when we have time. 
Even so, again, where are all the supporters? We’re only seeing numerous 
people rejecting the proposal

As to the these signed documents that Andrew is sending, as one doesn’t need 
to be a member of AFRINIC to have a say in the RDP, so anyone call really 
have their say. As to the process and what has been discussed, the RPD isn’t 
the only mailing list and there have been a comments on local mailing lists.

The majority of people and real jobs (paid for by an employer) and don’t 
have the time to follow and read everything, but do talk to others and keep 
up to date with what is going in. Not to be able to receive more than a /18 
now or a /22 in phase two in a two hear period, doesn’t take a rocket 
scientist to realise that it will kill any business and more importantly 
inhibit growth. It is well known, giving access to the internet, increases 
education, knowledge and quality of life thus reducing unemployment –all 
things that we really need to resolve in Africa. Why would any thinking 
person want to limit this?

The bottom line here is that this  shouldn’t have reached last call because 
of the lack unaddressed objections going back at least two years. It has 
been clear from the numerous objections that there is no consensus on this 

Chairs, please think and hear what the community are saying and act 
accordingly. This is wasting large amounts for time that could be used in 
other areas!

Let’s sell the resource to members, AFRINIC can then either reduce all our 
fees (to get inline with the other RIRs) from the extra revenue they are 
making and we get on with v6 deployment

Just my 2c..


From: Badru Ntege [mailto:badru.ntege at]
Sent: 04 December 2017 10:14 AM
To: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at>
Cc: AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion List <rpd at>
Subject: Re: [rpd] FW: Opposition to the changes in the AfriNIC Soft Landing 


You raise a number of points which need to be substantiated.  Probably 
offline with Board.

AfriNic belongs to the whole continent but if sentiments you share  are your 
opinion and not factual it is not good.  If they are factual a resolution 
needs to be explored.  Where board comes in.

On 4 Dec 2017, at 9:29 am, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at 
<mailto:Andrew.Alston at> > wrote:

Christian –

Why would people want to sign up to this list?

So they can be called Neo-Colonialists when they disagree?

Focus on the technical on RPD

So they can be insulted?  So they be attacked verballed and abused?  So that 
when that happens they can watch as the code of conduct on the list is never 
enforced and it happens time and time and time again?  So they can be 
spammed my messages that have nothing to do with policy and are often not 
based in any objective fact?

Are there actual issues where this has happened ?

Would like to hear from secretariat..

But please share some facts I’m sure the governance committee was also put 
in place to handle and guide how we handle.

I can fully understand why people stay away from this list – and further 
more – technical people subscribe to the list – these policies have business 
impact – and if you think that the C Level executives who are signing these 
documents are going to be on this list – think again – they rely on their 
technical people to report to them and give them the facts – they rely on 
the information from outside.  Very often, those technical people do not 
have the authority to sign a statement like that – however, the executives 
want the statement made.  Let them make it – it is them that are paying 
AfriNIC’s membership fees which let AfriNIC continue to exist


From: Christian Ahiauzu [mailto:christian.ahiauzu at]
Sent: 04 December 2017 00:49
To: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at 
<mailto:Andrew.Alston at> >
Cc: Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at 
<mailto:badru.ntege at> >; AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion 
List <rpd at <mailto:rpd at> >
Subject: Re: [rpd] FW: Opposition to the changes in the AfriNIC Soft Landing 

Hi Andrew,

On Dec 3, 2017 5:59 AM, "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at 
<mailto:Andrew.Alston at> > wrote:
> 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.

Yes. They are having their voice heard on the RPD, but the question is, if 
they haven't signed up on the RPD, are they hearing other peoples voices?

Remember, you are either participating on the RPD, or at the face to face 
meeting which is the climax of the PDP process. I wonder if these "ISPs" 
have been following the discussion on the list, and how the decisions where 
taken. I have no problem with someone protesting or appealing the decision 
of the co-chairs. However, they should give themselves the benefit of the 
doubt and participate in the processes that climaxed to the final rough 

> 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.

Going back to a "larger group" and explaining to them things, may not be the 
right way to go. Why should they not hear for themselves and judge for 
themselves. What is wrong with them signing up for a list and participating 
for themselves. With all due respect, I really think they should sign up on 
the List and even if they wish to put up a signed document, they are free to 
do so. My personal opinion please.

> Be curious to see how that plays out
> Andrew
> Get Outlook for iOS
> ________________________________
> From: Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at 
> <mailto: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.
> Regards
> 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.
>> Thanks
>> Andrew
>> From: Alan Barrett [mailto:alan.barrett at 
>> <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>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at <mailto:RPD at>

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

More information about the RPD mailing list