[rpd] Decisions ... Abuse contact

[Noah]

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 9:20 AM Madhvi Gokool <madhvi at afrinic.net> wrote:


> Dear Frank/Community members

>

>

> a) In the Impact Assessment, staff assumed that the policy will not impact

> the legacy resources in the AFRINIC whois database and requested the

> authors to confirm that this is so.  AFRINIC staff needs to keep this in

> consideration at the time of implementation(myafrinic and whois business

> rules) - abuse-c mandatory for non-legacy resources. Staff were therefore

> satisfied with this confirmation and had not indicated otherwise to the

> co-chairs and community in the session.

>

> b) "AFRINIC is bound by the Mauritian Data Protection Act 2017 (inspired

> by GDPR). For more information on AFRINIC's Privacy Policy, click on the

> following link - https://www.afrinic.net/privacy. Thus, implementation of

> the abuse-c will not impact negatively on AFRINIC's data protection

> obligations."

>

> c) The only policy that affects the legacy resource holders is documented

> in Section 5.7 of the CPM  - and it regards transfers of legacy resources.

> Legacy Holders are not bound by any other resource policies.

>

> Staff therefore will confirm with the authors that their policies do not

> affect legacy resources , especially when implementation will be done on

> the whois database.  This is  to ensure that the implementation does not

> negatively impact  how the legacy resource holders manage their resources

> on the whois database.

>

> d) In the Policy Implementation Experience Report during AFRINIC-32/AIS'20

> , staff have pointed out that Section 8 of the CPM does not enforce a

> mandatory abuse contact . They also mentioned that they are having to

> respond to an increase in complaints regarding missing abuse contacts in

> the number resources in the AFRINIC whois database and that operators have

> warned that they will filter the resources with no abuse contacts.  Staff

> are therefore doing the work for the members , as they are bound to respond

> to any queries that are logged with the AFRINIC service desk.  This

> situation is not scalable in the long term & AFRINIC invites the community

> to also ponder on this feedback.

>


Madhvi thanks for all the clarifications beyond the staff assessment.

Clearly this proposal had no valid objections, yet it was tossed back to
the list based on invalid definitions arguments as though we are all not
internet folk to understand what *abuse-c* really means.

Can we move forward to the last call now.

Cheers,
Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200930/ec6a973c/attachment.html>