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

Mon Dec 4 15:16:43 UTC 2017

Hi all,

Well lets not confuse silence with agreement and seeing the unpleasant
sentiments...one cant really blame some for keeping quiet.

I for one will *support* the policy because there is no such policy to deal
with such a scenario in the first place and the longer we stay without one
the more vulnerable we become. So I like to think I see the logic in the
arguments for the proposal however there is s greater danger in having NO
measure or policy in place rather than have a perfect one in place when it
is too late.

Additionally I am born and bred in Africa around the Lake Victoria and
while I too like to use and heavily rely on the Internet; the fact is I am
still in the minority and I too would like to see my kids enjoy it as well
as a neutral place with equal opportunities. So when it comes to this
discussion where I am not that *articulate or technical* to express my
concern as to what I think *is happening* and I have seen happen *before*
let me borrow the Nile Perch as an example,

*The Nile perch was introduced
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduced_species> to Lake Victoria
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Victoria> in East Africa
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Africa> in the 1950s,[5]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nile_perch#cite_note-5>[6]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nile_perch#cite_note-6> and has since been
fished commercially. It is attributed with causing the extinction or
near-extinction <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction> of several
hundred native species, with some populations fluctuating with commercial
fishing and the actual Nile perch stocks. The Nile perch initially fed on
native cichlids <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cichlid>, but with
decreasing availability of this prey, it now consumes mainly small shrimp
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrimp> and minnows
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnow>. The fish's introduction to Lake
Victoria was ecologically disruptive ..*
Well business has adjusted and gone on as usual and I am not saying I don't
eat fish (read: *use the Internet*) now...but for me who grew up around the
shores of Lake Victoria..I *do sorely miss* the other varieties as they
have now become a rarity and a luxury (*a reserve for the rich*)...so if we
use the logical argument that caters for the foreseeable thinkable future
the net result is that those who are not empowered or enlightened at this
point will not have a chance to do so when they do ripen.

Maybe it is a charity and is starting at home ...but I would think the
natives be allowed a chance to also own, develop and flourish in their
own (*now
special*) environment as children of the land and that to me would
define "*benefit
the community*". I would be wrong as there is no guarantee that they will
actually end up allocated to this group down the road but would rather take
and start with what stalls the consumption for now.

Best regards

--
Pic and more details below for those interested.
--
Ismail M. Settenda
General Manager
M +255 784 321183 / +255658321183
Skype/Twitter/G+: ismailmss

More details on this fish:

Adult Nile perch occupy all habitats of a lake with sufficient oxygen
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen> concentrations, while juveniles are
restricted to shallow or nearshore environments. A fierce predator
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predator> that dominates its surroundings,
the Nile perch feeds on fish <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish>
(including its own species), crustaceans
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crustaceans>, and insects
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insect>; the juveniles also feed on
zooplankton <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zooplankton>. Nile perch use
schooling <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoaling_and_schooling> as a
mechanism to protect themselves from other predators.

Nile perch have been introduced to many other lakes in Africa, including Lake
Victoria <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Victoria> (see below
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nile_perch#Lake_Victoria_introduction>) and
the artificial Lake Nasser <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Nasser>. The
IUCN <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IUCN>'s (World Conservation Union)
Invasive Species Specialist Group considers *L. niloticus* one of the
world's 100 worst invasive species.

The state of Queensland <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queensland> in
Australia levies heavy fines on anyone found in possession of a living Nile
perch, since it competes directly with the native barramundi
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barramundi>, which is similar and grows to
1.8 meters (5 ft 11 in) long while the Nile Perch grows to 2 meters (6 ft
7 in) long.

The species is of great commercial importance as a food fish. The Nile
perch is also popular with sport anglers
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing>, as it attacks artificial fishing
lures <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing_lure> and is also raised in
aquaculture <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquaculture>.
Lake Victoria introduction
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lates_niloticus_2.jpg>
Nile perch can grow to 2 meters (6 ft 7 in) and 200 kg (440 lb).[4]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nile_perch#cite_note-4>

The introduction of this species to Lake Victoria is one of the most cited
examples of the negative effects alien species can have on ecosystems.
See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nile_perch

On 4 December 2017 at 14:28, Saul Stein <saul at enetworks.co.za> wrote:

> 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 policy.
>
>
> 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..
>
>
>
> Saul
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Badru Ntege [mailto:badru.ntege at nftconsult.com]
> *Sent:* 04 December 2017 10:14 AM
> *To:* Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> *Cc:* AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion List <rpd at afrinic.net>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [rpd] FW: Opposition to the changes in the AfriNIC Soft
> Landing Policy
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
> 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 liquidtelecom.com>
> 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
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
> *From:* Christian Ahiauzu [mailto:christian.ahiauzu at uniport.edu.ng
> <christian.ahiauzu at uniport.edu.ng>]
> *Sent:* 04 December 2017 00:49
> *To:* Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> *Cc:* Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com>; AfriNIC Resource Policy
> Discussion List <rpd at afrinic.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [rpd] FW: Opposition to the changes in the AfriNIC Soft
> Landing Policy
>
>
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Dec 3, 2017 5:59 AM, "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> 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
> consensus.
>
> > 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 nftconsult.com>
> > 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 liquidtelecom.com>
> 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 afrinic.net]
> >> Sent: 02 December 2017 11:37
> >> To: Afrinic RPD <rpd at afrinic.net>
> >> 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 liquidtelecom.
> com> 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 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
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20171204/9c728448/attachment-0001.html>