[rpd] AFPUB-2018-GEN-001-DRAFT02

[S. Moonesamy]

Hi Jordi,
At 04:38 AM 08-04-2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:
>As said I don't need to ask for it. You mention above 5.1, which I 
>can't find in the policy manual, but in 3.4.1 Draft Policy Proposal, 
>I can read "The Working Group Chair(s) may request AFRINIC to 
>provide an analysis (technical, financial, legal or other), of the 
>impact of the draft policy proposal.", so not the authors!

Yes.

There could be technical information which is internal to Afrinic Ltd 
(e.g. you might have noticed that, for this proposal, identifying it 
would be fortuitous).

>I'm sure I mention this in Dakar, this should be something automatic 
>for any policy proposal/version and I believe the staff is doing so.

I don't recall whether I followed that part of the policy meeting.

>
>     At 12:59 AM 08-04-2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:
>     >I've re-read the bylaws (https://afrinic.net/bylaws) and the RSA and
>     >AMA (https://afrinic.net/membership/agreements).
>     >
>     >Unless I'm wrong, there is not any explicit mention regarding if in
>     >case of policy violation, the voting rights can be or can't be
>     >suspended, so this may depend on the overall interpretation by the
>     >Mauritius law.
>     >
>     >This is typically the same actually for other obligations. So if the
>     >law allows a member that is not paying the bills (same for not
>     >following policies) to get its rights suspended, voting is typically
>     >one of them.
>
>     The two cases are, in my opinion, not similar.  A person reading the
>     proposal would not notice that the "rights" or his/her organization
>     could be suspended.  I would not have noticed it either as there
>     wasn't any information to point to that.
>
>Well, in my opinion, reading only the policy manual, with is part of 
>the overall legal documents for each RIR, is wrong. You need to make 
>sure to follow *all* the binding documents (in fact all them 
>constitute a "single" one with several parts). If we need to mention 
>in each policy every other part of the legal documents, then it 
>becomes cumbersome to handle. It will be like having in every 
>section of the policy manual something like "if you don't follow 
>this, you're not following the bylaws+RSA+AMA and your resources can 
>be reclaimed".

Yes.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy