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

[rpd] Appeal against softlanding-bis declaration of consensus

Owen DeLong owen at
Thu Jan 4 19:17:56 UTC 2018

> On Jan 4, 2018, at 07:21 , Marcus K. G. Adomey <madomey at> wrote:
> Hi Mark Elkins,
> I may agree with you that Sander and Owen have rich experience in policy matters in the context of their region. 

I believe I have significant experience in policy matters in several regions, including AfriNIC, APNIC,
and ARIN as well as significant policy experience in LACNIC and some policy experience in RIPE.

> What they have failed to understand is that African context is different from theirs. And this is the main reason why AfriNIC was created to adapt numbers resources allocation to African realities.

I fully understand that the African context is somewhat different. However, in many ways, it is not as different as many Africans would like us to believe. How many of the Africans calling out this difference have significant experience in the other regions? How can you accurately insist something is different when your perspective is limited to only the thing you are calling different with minimal knowledge or experience of the other?

> So far, they failed to show how the process was not followed  and point out issues not addressed and which can impact  a large part of the African internet community. Like others, they keep expressing their feelings, thoughts  perceptions and speculations.

This isn’t true. Several of the issues not addressed are described in the appeal document. I’ve posted several specific issues that have not been addressed.

Fact: The proposal will prevent an ISP that needs more than a /18 from returning for additional space that they need for a period of up to 24 months.
Fact: The proposal in doing so is unfairly favorable to smaller organizations.
If you remove the 24 month moratorium on additional requests, then you are protecting those at the back of the line from hogs in front. But with the 24 month waiting period, instead of protecting those in line, you start protecting unnamed non-existent requests that may come in the future at the expense of existing providers with existing need.

> RIPE and ARIN do adopt policies, but not based on full consensus. Policies discussions archives are available  for each region and attest this.

Sure, but we’ve never adopted a policy with so much opposition.


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

More information about the RPD mailing list