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

[rpd] Question

BINEMO SHADIMIADI Jean Guelord guelordshadimiadi at gmail.com
Fri Jan 3 17:15:24 UTC 2020


Thank you!

Le ven. 3 janv. 2020 à 18:52, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> a écrit :


>

>

> On Dec 30, 2019, at 19:42 , BINEMO SHADIMIADI Jean Guelord <

> guelordshadimiadi at gmail.com> wrote:

>

> I would need to know and understand one thing: if there is no respect of the deadline for the examination of a policy what to do so that we put this policy to the review?

>

>

> The PDP is written in such a way that it depends to some extent on the

> good faith actions of the participants.

>

> It is especially dependent on the good faith actions of the co-chairs

> elected by the community, the Board, and the Appeals Committee.

>

> that what guarantees impartiality in policy reviews?

>

>

> In the current PDP, primarily the good faith actions of the co-chairs and

> secondarily the appeals committee and the board.

>

> Owen

>

>

> Le sam. 21 déc. 2019 à 03:15, <rpd-request at afrinic.net> a écrit :

>

>> Send RPD mailing list submissions to

>> rpd at afrinic.net

>>

>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit

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

>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

>> rpd-request at afrinic.net

>>

>> You can reach the person managing the list at

>> rpd-owner at afrinic.net

>>

>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific

>> than "Re: Contents of RPD digest..."

>>

>>

>> Today's Topics:

>>

>> 1. Re: Decisions on policy proposals discussed during themeeting

>> (Owen DeLong)

>>

>>

>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>>

>> Message: 1

>> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 17:13:47 -0800

>> From: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>

>> To: ABDULKARIM AYOPO OLOYEDE <oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng>

>> Cc: rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>, Caleb Olumuyiwa Ogundele

>> <muyiwacaleb at gmail.com>

>> Subject: Re: [rpd] Decisions on policy proposals discussed during

>> themeeting

>> Message-ID: <3DB85E14-7AC9-4EF7-84B2-F342097316C2 at delong.com>

>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

>>

>> As much as I?d like for this particular abuse of the PDP to go away, I

>> think that no emergency exists which justifies invoking 3.6 in this case.

>>

>> Owen

>>

>>

>> > On Dec 20, 2019, at 09:30 , ABDULKARIM AYOPO OLOYEDE <

>> oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng> wrote:

>> >

>> > Dear Caleb

>> > See below

>> >

>> > "3.6 Varying the Process

>> >

>> > The process outlined in this document may vary in the case of an

>> emergency. Variance is for use when a one-time waiving of some provision of

>> this document is required.

>> >

>> > The decision to vary the process is taken by a Working Group Chair.

>> > There must be an explanation about why the variance is needed.

>> > The review period, including the Last Call, shall not be less than

>> four weeks.

>> > If there is consensus, the policy is approved and it must be

>> presented at the next Public Policy Meeting.

>> >

>> > Thanks

>> > co-Chair PDWG

>> >

>> > On Fri, 20 Dec 2019, 16:27 Caleb Olumuyiwa Ogundele, <

>> muyiwacaleb at gmail.com <mailto:muyiwacaleb at gmail.com>> wrote:

>> > Dear Co-Chairs,

>> >

>> > While I appreciate your painstaking report, could you point to my

>> attention or educate me on any part of the CPM that gives you authority to

>> make a decision such as rejecting or dropping a policy because it has been

>> on the docket for awhile or you have personal opinions or concerns about it?

>> >

>> > For the purpose of calling your attention to the statement, find it

>> pasted below...

>> >

>> > The Co-chairs are considering dropping this policy entirely because it

>> has been around for some time without achieving consensus. It is also

>> noticed that the authors failed to attempt to address a lot of concerns.

>> > Co-chairs have spent a lot of time on this proposal (over the last 1

>> month) reviewing comments and responses from previous meetings and believe

>> that the authors did not address or attempt to address most of the major

>> issues raised in the latest version. The CPM allows us to vary the process

>> in the best interest of the community hence we shall work with the authors

>> of this proposal in the coming months to see if there can be a way forward

>> on this proposal. A decision shall be made based on this before the next

>> policy meeting to avoid wasting the limited and precious time during the

>> policy meeting. A proposal cannot continue to have an infinite loop hence

>> the need to vary the process.

>> >

>> > Caleb Ogundele

>> >

>> > On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 11:18 AM ABDULKARIM AYOPO OLOYEDE <

>> oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng <mailto:oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng>> wrote:

>> > AFRINIC31 Public Policy Meeting (PPM)

>> > (held in Luanda, Angola)

>> >

>> > Decisions on policy proposals discussed during the meeting

>> >

>> >

>> > DAY1

>> >

>> > 1. Multihoming not required for ASN (Co-Chairs Decision:

>> Consensus)

>> > https://afrinic.net/policy/2019-asn-001-d4#proposal <

>> https://afrinic.net/policy/2019-asn-001-d4#proposal>

>> > On Last Call

>> > This proposal has reached a rough consensus. Since most major

>> objections have been addressed, we declare rough consensus on this

>> proposal. The last call for this proposal is till Monday 13 January 2020.

>> > The current ASN policy requires multihoming (or plan thereof) before

>> qualifying for an ASN.

>> > ? This proposal modifies this requirement, adding the option to

>> ?demonstrate a technical need? for the ASN.

>> > ? Sites that do not need the global ASN can still use a private

>> ASN per RFC1930, RFC6996.

>> >

>> >

>> > 2. Adjusting IPv6 PA Policy (Co-Chairs Decision: Consensus)

>> > https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-ipv6-002-d1#proposal <

>> https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-ipv6-002-d1#proposal>

>> > On Last Call

>> > This proposal has reached a rough consensus. Since most major

>> objections have been addressed, we declare rough consensus on this

>> proposal. The last call for this proposal is next Monday 13 January 2020.

>> > ? The proposal corrects and aligns recent changes to IPv6 PI

>> policy with IPv6 PA policy, especially on the need for issued IPv6 PA space

>> to be announced within 12 months of receiving it. The current need to

>> assign a /48 to a PoP (6.5.4.2) is also removed

>> >

>> > 3. Abuse Contact Policy Update (Co-Chairs Decision: No Consensus)

>> > https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2018-gen-001-d5 <

>> https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2018-gen-001-d5>

>> > back to list for further discussion and refinement

>> > This proposal did not reach a rough consensus because of the concerns

>> about the confusion brought by the system were not addressed. There are

>> also voices in the community that one attribute is enough. This also

>> remains unaddressed.

>> > ? The proposal makes it mandatory for AFRINIC to include with

>> each resource registration a contact where network abuse from users of

>> those resources will be reported.

>> > ? Proposed whois DB attribute (abuse-c) ? to be used to publish

>> abuse public contact information

>> > ? There?s also a process to ensure that abuse report must be

>> received by the recipient, and that contacts are validated by AFRINIC

>> regularly.

>> >

>> >

>> > 4. AFRINIC Policy Development Process Bis v5 (No Consensus)

>> > https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2017-gen-002-d5#proposal <

>> https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2017-gen-002-d5#proposal>

>> > back to list for further discussion and refinement

>> > The proposal did not reach a consensus because of concerns over the

>> necessity and practicality of this proposal has not been addressed. The

>> debate over the superiority of the current development process over the

>> proposed one has not been addressed.

>> >

>> > The proposal is a complete revision of the current Policy Development

>> Process (CPM 3.0). Key highlights are:

>> > ? Provides for different and distinct phases for a policy

>> proposal?s cycle through the PDP - from adoption through the last call to

>> Board ratification.

>> > ? Clarifies the consensus process around major and minor

>> objections

>> > ? Clarifies responsibilities of Chairs of the working group and

>> their role on how to determine the presence (or lack) of consensus.

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> > 5. RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned AFRINIC Address Space

>> (Co-Chairs Decision Consensus)

>> > https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-006-d1#proposal <

>> https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-006-d1#proposal>

>> > On Last Call

>> > This proposal reached a rough consensus. Since most major objections

>> have been addressed, rough consensus on this proposal has been reached. The

>> last call for this proposal is next Monday 13th Jan 2020.

>> > The purpose of this proposal is to restrict the propagation of BGP

>> announcements of address space not yet issued by AFRINIC.

>> > ? AFRINIC to create ROAs with origin AS0 (zero) for all unissued

>> address space.

>> > ? For space to be issued, ROAs with origin AS0 will have to be

>> revoked, and ROAs with origin AS0 must not be visible in RPKI repositories.

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> > DAY2

>> >

>> > 6. Resource Transfer Policy (Co-Chairs Decision: No Consensus)

>> > https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-v4-003-d1#proposal <

>> https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-v4-003-d1#proposal>

>> > Back to list for further discussion and refinement

>> > The proposal did not reach consensus as some objections was raised such

>> as the proposed No need basis

>> > ? Allows for transfers of IPv4 resources (only) between AFRINIC

>> and other regions.

>> > ? No limit and conditions on resource size and frequency of

>> transfers, as long as both parties mutually agree.

>> > ? No needs assessment by AFRINIC on the recipient.

>> > ? Legacy resources retain legacy resource status after transfer.

>> >

>> > 7. M&A Resource Transfers (Co-Chairs Decision: No Consensus)

>> > https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-004-d1#proposal <

>> https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-004-d1#proposal>

>> > Back to list for further discussion and refinement

>> > This proposal has not reached a consensus because of concerns about the

>> necessity of this proposal has not been addressed. There are voices that

>> the current system works well and that this proposal is pointless without

>> an Inter RIR transfer policy. These remain unaddressed.

>> > ? Because AFRINIC does not currently have a policy for

>> transfers of resources as a result of M&A (Mergers and Acquisitions between

>> companies), this proposal attempts to establish such a mechanism for such

>> cases.

>> > ? Only applicable to Intra-RIR cases (companies under the AFRINIC

>> service region).

>> > ? Replaces the current ?procedure document defined by staff? as

>> this is not optimal and falls totally outside community control.

>> >

>> >

>> > 8. IPv4 Inter-RIR Resource Transfers (Comprehensive Scope)

>> ((Co-Chairs Decision: No Consensus)

>> > https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-ipv4-002-d3#proposal <

>> https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-ipv4-002-d3#proposal>

>> > Back to list for further discussion and refinement

>> > This proposal has not reached consensus. The proposal puts in place a

>> mechanism to transfer IPv4 and (some ASN) resources between AFRINIC and

>> other RIRs, as well as between AFRINIC members/entities.

>> > ? A transfer source can only receive additional resources after

>> 24 months of the previous transfer

>> > ? A resource can only be transferred after 12 months after issue.

>> > ? IPv4 legacy resources lose that status after transfer.

>> > ? Outgoing transfers cease if for 6 months, outgoing resources

>> are more than incoming resources.

>> >

>> > 9. Impact Analysis is Mandatory (Co-Chairs Decision: No Consensus)

>> > https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-005-d1#proposal <

>> https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-005-d1#proposal>

>> > Back to list for further discussion and refinement

>> > This proposal has not reached a consensus because of concerns about the

>> necessity and practicality of this proposal have not been addressed.

>> > ? Modifies CPM 3.0 to make staff impact assessments of new

>> proposals mandatory, along with other minor changes.

>> >

>> > ? Introduces new timelines for submission of draft proposals

>> > ? Requires each new draft proposal to have a staff analysis 4

>> weeks after it?s received

>> > ? If AFRINIC needs more time, the justification to be provided to

>> community

>> >

>> >

>> > 10. Internet Number Resources review by AFRINIC draft8 (Co-Chairs

>> Decision: No Consensus )

>> > https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2016-gen-001-d8#proposal <

>> https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2016-gen-001-d8#proposal>

>> > This proposal has not reached consensus after many iterations spanning

>> over 8 iterations spanning over 3 years (from May 2016).

>> > The proposal sets a framework for AFRINIC to conduct reviews/audits of

>> resource utilization by members (to ensure efficient and appropriate use).

>> > ? Audits can be random or selected (by AFRINIC) or reported (by

>> whistle-blower).

>> > ? Resources not complying are recovered and can be reallocated.

>> >

>> > The Co-chairs are considering dropping this policy entirely because it

>> has been around for some time without achieving consensus. It is also

>> noticed that the authors failed to attempt to address a lot of concerns.

>> > Co-chairs have spent a lot of time on this proposal (over the last 1

>> month) reviewing comments and responses from previous meetings and believe

>> that the authors did not address or attempt to address most of the major

>> issues raised in the latest version. The CPM allows us to vary the process

>> in the best interest of the community hence we shall work with the authors

>> of this proposal in the coming months to see if there can be a way forward

>> on this proposal. A decision shall be made based on this before the next

>> policy meeting to avoid wasting the limited and precious time during the

>> policy meeting. A proposal cannot continue to have an infinite loop hence

>> the need to vary the process.

>> >

>> > 11. Proposal: AFRINIC Number Resources Transfer Policy (Co-Chairs

>> Decision: No Consensus)

>> > https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-002-d2#proposal <

>> https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-002-d2#proposal>

>> > Back to list for further discussion and refinement

>> > This proposal has not reached consensus. Concerns regarding the unclear

>> wording about the assignment and the excessive amount of need for AFRINIC's

>> approval have not been addressed.

>> > ? Allows for transfers of IPv4 and ASN resources (only) between

>> AFRINIC and other regions.

>> > ? The recipient must demonstrate the need for the resources.

>> > ? Legacy resources once transferred will lose that status and

>> fall under RSA.

>> > ? Reserved resources cannot be transferred.

>> >

>> > 12. Chairs Elections Process (Co-Chairs Decision: No Consensus)

>> > https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-007-d1#proposal <

>> https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-007-d1#proposal>

>> > Back to list for further discussion and refinement

>> > This proposal has not reached consensus. Concerns on e-voting and the

>> criteria of chair candidate have not been addressed. The policy was not

>> supported by anyone during the Public Policy meeting

>> > ? The proposal is an effort to improve the process for

>> election/selection of Policy Development Working Group (PDWG) co-chairs.

>> > ? Addresses conflict of interest issues.

>> > ? Restrictions for co-chairs to be from different countries.

>> > ? Co-Chairs must represent AFRINIC members or be nominated by

>> AFRINIC members.

>> > ? Must have been active on rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:

>> rpd at afrinic.net> list for at least 6 months.

>> > ? Must present planned achievements

>> >

>> > Thank You

>> >

>> > Co-Chairs PDWG

>> >

>> >

>> > Website <http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/>, Weekly Bulletin <

>> http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/bulletin> UGPortal <

>> http://uilugportal.unilorin.edu.ng/> PGPortal <

>> https://uilpgportal.unilorin.edu.ng/>

>> >

>> > _______________________________________________

>> > 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>

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> > Website <http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/>, Weekly Bulletin <

>> http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/bulletin> UGPortal <

>> http://uilugportal.unilorin.edu.ng/> PGPortal <

>> https://uilpgportal.unilorin.edu.ng/>

>> >

>> > _______________________________________________

>> > 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/20191220/d32ea57c/attachment.html

>> >

>>

>> ------------------------------

>>

>> Subject: Digest Footer

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> RPD mailing list

>> RPD at afrinic.net

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

>>

>>

>> ------------------------------

>>

>> End of RPD Digest, Vol 159, Issue 20

>> ************************************

>>

> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at afrinic.net

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

>

>

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200103/293eca76/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the RPD mailing list