[rpd] Transfer Policy Proposal v.3.docx

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ]

Hi Taiwo, all,

I've looked into the doc.

Let me say something before going into a more detailed analysis: I *fully support* this proposal, and I will be happy to withdraw it once:
1) The staff confirms that all the points on the staff analysis have been cleared and thus, the policy could be implemented and will be functional in the intended purpose.
2) The board ratifies the policy (which means also it passes the last call).

Why? If anything in the process fails, I still believe my proposal is clearer and never mind is my proposal or this one I'm happy to work with the authors to make sure to resolve the issues that may happen as indicated in 1 and 2 above (hopefully there are no issues).

I've now a more detailed analysis, please really, needs to be taken seriously with the staff or we may ruin the policy and not allow to be functional.

There is something which doesn't make sense: The text in point 5.7. The CPM should be read always as "actual" so "soon will exhaust ..." is not logic, neither needed for the purpose of this policy. In addition, there are typos there ...

This is an editorial change that according to the PDP should be possible as part of the last call. I will suggest to keep it simple:
5.7 IPv4 Resources transfer
This policy applies to an organization with a justified need for IPv4 resources (recipients) and organizations with IPv4 resources which no longer need (sources).

I see that the "disputes" issue has been resolved! Tks! Anyway, I think there is another editorial problem there.
Actual text:
5.7.3.1 The source must be the current rightful holder of the IPv4 address resources registered with any RIR, and shall be in compliance with the policies of the receiving RIR, and shall not be involved in any dispute as to the status of those resources.

I suggest:
5.7.3.1 The source must be the current rightful holder of the IPv4 address resources registered with any RIR, in compliance with the relevant policies, and shall not be involved in any dispute as to the status of those resources.

Keeping the "policies of the receiving RIR" is contradictory ... changing it with "relevant policies" allows both RIRs to ensure that everything is correct.

Grammar maybe, I'm not English native speaker:
"for 12 months period" or "for a 12 months period"

I think 5.7.3.3. doesn't add any value, it could be removed and doesn't change anything: if there is no limite, no need to mention it. If there is not agreement, clearly the transfer will not happen because the parties don't authorize it, and then the RIR(s) don't authorize it!

Similarly 5.7.4.2. could be removed as well. We already said that the recipient should comply with policies (5.7.3.1), so what is this adding? Just superfluous text.

Note also my imputs in the previous email, regarding the hold period and the legacy status. I think 5.7.4.3, should be "IPv4 legacy resources "Transferred incoming or within AFRINIC IPv4 legacy resources will no longer be regarded as legacy resources".

5.7.5.1 is already indicated by the staff as something problematic with the actual wording. The transferring party (the source) may not have any relation (not a member) with the receiving RIR. With this text we are enforcing *all the RIRs* to offer a standard template and process on our mandate. WE CAN'T DO THAT. Our policies only have a mandate in AFRINIC, not in the other RIRs.

If we just remove section 5.7.5, and leave it to the staff as part of the operational procedure, the the problem is resolved because the existing process among the all other 4 RIRs for transfers will be "joined" by AFRINIC. It is just a matter of interconection among systems and processes!

I think all this should be carefully studied among the authors and the staff and the chairs should make sure that the verstion coming to last call has corrected all those issues.

I hope all this is useful.
 
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 23/9/20 9:38, "Taiwo Oyewande" <taiwo.oyewande88 at gmail.com> escribió:

    Hello PDWG,

    Attached is the updated version of the Resource Transfer Policy proposal. As recommended, changes have been effected on sub-section  5.7.3.2, and 5.7.4.3 according to the co-chair summary. 


    _______________________________________________
    RPD mailing list
    RPD at afrinic.net
    https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.