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

[rpd] Opposing the last call made on the review policy

Gregoire Ehoumi gregoire.ehoumi at
Wed Dec 5 13:02:26 UTC 2018

Again the Current PDP is clear on chairs prerogatives in determining consensus at PPM and they did it during Afrinic-29 like at other meetings.

I do not recall authors claim about congruity with ARIN review policy. You pointed to that policy in may 2016- when some were crying about implementation  impact on  afrinic and if any other RIR has done this before. (*)

While it is good to learn from peers, AFRINIC community should design what matches the best needs of this region. On your claims about the differences between the proposal and the ARIN policy, I recommend that  people read the section 12 of ARIN Policy manual at to make  their minds and draw their own conclusions.

To conclude,  repeating old  arguments without proposing acceptable solutions does not change the course of things in a Policy development  Process.

Last call gives opportunity for final review. Let not miss this.




------ Original message------From: Owen DeLongDate: Mon, Dec 3, 2018 6:31 PMTo: Gregoire Ehoumi;Cc: Ernest Byaruhanga;Nishal Goburdhan;rpd;Subject:Re: [rpd] Opposing the last call made on the review policy

On Dec 3, 2018, at 14:54 , Gregoire Ehoumi via RPD <rpd at> wrote:

There is no provision in the curent PDP which mandates, updates/revisions to a proposal  before it got  presented at a PPM. The agenda was published and as expected, no one we see another incentive for PDP-BIS  which defines a clear lifecycle  of proposal?
Nobody is questioning this. Nobody (that I have seen so far) is objecting to the proposal being discussed at the meeting.
What is being objected to is the proposal being declared as having consensus and sent to last call when none of the outstanding objections from Dakar were addressed, no updates were made to the proposal, and a plethora of objections were raised at Hammamet, including some which were repeated from Dakar.
I find it curious that a policy  proposal which aims to improve  resource usage, provide better accountability within an RIR ecosystem  raises so much controversy. Perhaps this is because many of us do not believe that the policy will have a result that is at all consistent with the stated intent above (which, btw, does not entirely match the problem statement in the proposal itself).
Members sign RSA which bind them to such review,  but when it comes to defining a community consensus approach to the review, it becomes stormy 
The review in the RSA does not allow for any random party to force AfriNIC to initiate such a costly and burdensome process against any particular member without probable cause to do so. The proposed policy does.
Are we afraid of enforcement of new policy and not of the RSA?
There are significant differences between the RSA and the proposal. The proposal goes significantly further and eliminates several avenues for avoiding a costly and burdensome process which are left open in the RSA. The arguments against this proposal are not being made (to the best of my knowledge) by people who are hoarding resources and would not at the end of such a review be found to be in full compliance. However, the cost of the review process for any organization with a significant network is significant both in time and money.
I hope this clarifies the reason for some of the objections and allows you to see the deep and meaningful flaws in the proposal as it currently stands.
Authors have claimed congruity in this proposal with the existing policy in the ARIN region. The policy in the ARIN region was not put forth to grant extraordinary additional powers of review to the ARIN staff. It was put forth to place strict limits on those powers. There are differences in this proposal which achieve the exact opposite of that.

------ Original message------From: Ernest ByaruhangaDate: Mon, Dec 3, 2018 6:02 AMTo: Nishal Goburdhan;Cc: rpd;Subject:Re: [rpd] Opposing the last call made on the review policy

> have there been any updates to this policy since the previous meeting.


Version 6 was received on 10 April 2018, and no newer version thereafter.

More info:


RPD mailing list
RPD at

RPD mailing list
RPD at

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

More information about the RPD mailing list