[rpd] Softlanding-Bis decision appeal

Tue Jan 2 20:04:56 UTC 2018

Heh it’s pretty simple - we are appealing the fact that consensus was declared while issues remain entirely unaddressed - and we cannot appeal consensus without pointing to the content and issues that have remain unaddressed (of which there are many of them - as will become plain when the full appeal document comes out)

Andrew

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: Eucharia Chimbuzor Nwachukwu <eucharia.nwachukwu at uniport.edu.ng>
Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2018 11:41:59 AM
To: Owen DeLong
Cc: rpd List
Subject: Re: [rpd] Softlanding-Bis decision appeal

Compliments of the season gentlemen and ladies,
I am a bit confused at the issues raised by Owen. I thought the appeal Andrew is leading concerns the 'rough concensus' granted to the policy and not the content of the policy itself. Most recent comments are talking about content of the policy which I did not see as part of appeal. Please, Andrew clarify the house. Are you appealing the process of concensus of the policy or contents of the policy or both?
Kind regards,
Eucharia Nwachukwu

On Dec 1, 2017 6:34 PM, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com<mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
With all due respect, Ali of Comoros, the policy proposal has a number of serious
flaws which are harmful to the Internet and harmful to real world operational
businesses going forward today. The current proposal has done little to address
these issues as the core idea itself is fundamentally flawed.

I’m not calling anyone clueless, but I am calling the proposal a triumph of
misinformation and/or misunderstanding of the fundamentals of internet operations
and a clear and deliberate effort to obfuscate the genuine mathematics of
the present IPv4 situation.

Andrew is exactly right about who the beneficiaries of this proposal would
be (operators who don’t understand the mathematics of current operational
reality who wish to begin operations at a later date hoping there will still
be space available to do so) regardless of whether that defined class represents
anyone here or not.

Owen

> On Dec 1, 2017, at 02:09 , ALI Hadji Mmadi <alihadji90 at gmail.com<mailto:alihadji90 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew
> I hope you are doing well.
> Reagrding  your email, I thing in this case we do not need a
> parliamentary group to make a bloc. we need clear and objective ideas.
> Following the SL Bis presentation, I realized that the co-authors have
> added SL SD ideas. to meet the real need of the community. So instead
> of coming together to appeal, I propose that you give cleary your
> proposal in order to go ahead in the phase of ratification of the
> policy.
> A little respect to the community, it is not as clueless as you think it is.
> Ali Of Comoros.
>
>
> 2017-12-01 9:19 GMT+01:00 Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com<mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>>:
>> Hi All,
>>
>>
>>
>> Considering the decision to take the soft-landing bis policy into last call
>> yesterday – the following individuals wish to state that we are officially
>> appealing the decision by the co-chairs in this regard:
>>
>>
>>
>> Ben Maddison
>>
>> Andrew Alston
>>
>> Mark Elkins
>>
>> Christopher Mwangi
>>
>>
>>
>> Over the last 2 years there have been sustained and unaddressed objections
>> to this policy.  There have been multiple requests by this community to
>> withdraw this policy.  There was a statement by the authors in Mauritius
>> that the policy would be withdrawn that was reneged.  The list archives
>> clearly show that there was – and remains opposition to this policy.  The
>> rules of the PDP are clear – consensus is not based on what is said at the
>> floor of the meeting alone, but is derived from the sum total of comments
>> and objections both on the floor and the lists – and includes any objections
>> that are sustained and unaddressed.
>>
>>
>>
>> While we are happy to engage with the chairs on this issue in the public
>> forum that is this list – we also see little hope of resolution without
>> going to the formal appeal committee should the chairs not decide to reverse
>> their decision, which we believe was taken in error.
>>
>>
>>
>> We also welcome any other individuals who wish to add their names to this
>> appeal – and note that individuals wishing to do so, by the appeal process,
>> are free to join the appeal process irrespective of their comments or lack
>> of comments on the policy to date – since the appeal surrounds procedural
>> error – rather than the content of the specific policy itself.
>>
>>
>>
>> Further emails will follow in due course detailing the objections raised on
>> the list and the floor of previous meetings that have never been addressed,
>> and we will clearly demonstrate the error that was made in the consensus
>> declaration.
>>
>>
>>
>> Further to this – any of the appellants reserve the right  to continue to
>> contribute during the last call for the duration of the appeal and may
>> continue to state their objections during the last call – so that in the
>> event of this appeal failing – and consensus in last call being declared –
>> the ground work is laid for a second appeal.
>>
>>
>>
>> Yours Sincerely
>>
>>
>>
>> Andrew Alston
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net<mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net<mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>

_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
RPD at afrinic.net<mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20180102/28b869b4/attachment-0001.html>