[rpd] New Policy Proposal Received - "IPv4 Inter-RIR Legacy Resource Transfers (Comprehensive Scope) AFPUB-2019-v4-002-DRAFT01"

[Sylvain BAYA]

Hi all,

Please see my comments below (inline)...

Le 8/29/2019 à 4:56 PM, Ernest Byaruhanga a écrit :

> Jordi,

>

>> On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 at 08:49, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD

>> <rpd at afrinic.net> wrote:

>>> In short. I'm waiting for the staff impact analysis (Ernest any news ?). Once we got that, in addition to resolving any issues discovered by the staff, I will add a "security belt" to the existing text, in the line of:

>>>

>>> 1.Each time a transfer is completed, the relevant, non-confidential information will be automatically published in a specific web page, including at least: Date of the transfer, transferred addresses, source organization and RIR, destination organization and RIR.

>

> Staff assessment reports for the two transfer policy proposals are available at:

>

>   IPv4 Inter-RIR Legacy Resource Transfers

>   https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-v4-001-d1#staff-assessment

>

>   IPv4 Inter-RIR Resource Transfers (Comprehensive Scope)

>   https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-v4-002-d1#staff-assessment


Dear Ernest,
After reading your, too much awaited, Impact Analysis report (IAr) i
have some questions : 

• I don't understand why you added the word “currently” in 1.0 a). It
seems to render the 
statement false. {/i'm not an English native language though. So excuse
my ignorance, where /
/applicable/}
• The RSA (Registration Service Agrement) section 6. (d) (iv), (v),
(vi), (vii) states that “/[...]the transfer /
/of number resources is strictly prohibited, from except in the event of
the Applicant becoming the /
/subject of merger and/or acquisition proceedings or where such transfer
is effected in compliance /
/with adopted policies;[...]/” ; some of what you wish to prevent, in
2.1 b., seems to be allowed by 
the RSA...then how to deal with that ?
• In 2.1 a. you seem to suggest that the author also treat the case of
ASN transfers, is it not better 
to encourage any other volunteer to propose such a draft policy proposal
? Don't forget that, 
these draft policy proposals are just amending the CPM section 5.7.
Then, if you add other 
resources than IPv4, it might sound problematic... :-/
• I'm not getting the point in 2.2 a. What i mean is that, CPM section
3.4.5 states that after the end 
of *the last call* on a draft policy proposal has been declared, the
Staff has *less than six months* 
to implement it. Then it automatically starts to serve. Please can you
explain why there should be 
a *special need to specify some conditions on the beginning of this
draft policy proposal, if ratified ? 

Thanks.

Shalom,
--sb.


> Regards,

> Ernest.

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at afrinic.net

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd


-- 

Regards,
Sylvain B.
<http://www.chretiennement.org> 
__
Website : <https://www.cmnog.cm>
Wiki : <https://www.cmnog.cm/dokuwiki>
Surveys : <https://survey.cmnog.cm>
Subscribe to Mailing List : <https://lists.cmnog.cm/mailman/listinfo/cmnog/>
Mailing List's Archives : <https://lists.cmnog.cm/pipermail/cmnog/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20190830/7b9a17ba/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0x0387408365AC8594.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 4826 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20190830/7b9a17ba/attachment-0001.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20190830/7b9a17ba/attachment-0001.sig>