[rpd] End of Last call

[Daniel Yakmut]

The Co-chairs have severally quoted the PDP and CPM to justify their
actions. But severally also, some members have not agreed by quoting same
sources. It seems we are all heading to a stand off.

My suggestions, will be for us to all lean back and draw from our bags of
wisdom and bring this matter to an amicable end.

Dan

On Oct 9, 2020 7:11 AM, "lucilla fornaro" <lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com>
wrote:


> dear Arnaud,

>

> Is the CPM an argument subjectifs et tendancieux? Many tend to repeat

> things over and over again because we are facing over and over again the

> same impasse. No different objections are presented, so you cannot receive

> different answers.

>  Even if I have tried to understand somebody's else perspective, I now

> realize that many are focus on their own personal interests. Fine, we have

> the co-chairs and the CPM to guide us out of this impasse and to make the

> best decisions in the interest of the community.

>

> As the co-chair, Abdulkarim Oloyede pointed out, what section of the CPM

> they breached? Because keep making false unfounded accusations is not doing

> any good to the community.

>

> Lucilla

>

> Il giorno ven 9 ott 2020 alle ore 11:21 Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com>

> ha scritto:

>

>> +1 @Noah, Miriam et Fernando j'apprécie la façon dont vous opposez des

>> arguments concrets et précis à des sentiments subjectifs et tendancieux.

>>

>> AFRINIC -----> EN AVANT !

>>

>> Arnaud

>>

>> Le jeu. 8 oct. 2020 à 19:53, ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE <

>> oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng> a écrit :

>>

>>> Dear Jordi and PDWG,

>>>  Please find attached the final version of the two proposals. The board

>>> prerogatives had no editorial changes however there were editorial changes

>>> on the Transfer policy proposal. The version could not have been published

>>> on the web page until the co-chairs approved it. However, It should have

>>> been included in the initial email, we apologies for this.

>>>

>>> @Caleb, Thank you we are happy to consult even beyond previous chairs,

>>> and we are currently doing that. Regarding publishing of draft proposal,

>>> It was published before the online meeting, or which meeting are you

>>> referring too? We don't understand what you mean, and Please reread the CPM

>>> before coming to conclusions. Do not assume what the CPM says. Read it.!!!

>>> The CPM says

>>> 3.4.3 Last Call

>>>

>>> A final review of the draft policy is initiated by the Working Group

>>> Chair(s) by sending an announcement to the Resource Policy Discussion

>>> mailing list. The Last Call period shall be at least two weeks. *The

>>> Working Group Chair(s) shall evaluate the feedback received during the

>>> Public Policy Meeting and during this period and decide whether consensus

>>> has been achieved*.

>>>

>>> Please point me to the section that says Changes cannot be made during

>>> the last call? All we did was to do a final review and evaluate the

>>> discussion. Let us stop these false accusations. Everything we do is in our

>>> best interest even when we are left with few choices.

>>> There have also been some individuals saying Co-chairs did not follow

>>> the PDP. *Can you please elaborate which aspect of the PDP we didn't

>>> follow?*. Jordi said we did not wait for a response from staff as to if

>>> the policy is reciprocal. Please Jordi should point us to the section of

>>> the CPM that said we should wait for this before taking a decision?. In any

>>> event, this can only be checked with the final approved version, and that

>>> was exactly what we had asked staff to do because this is only logical.

>>>   We asked the authors to make changes based on the comment of the

>>> community. We made sure that the comments of the community were taken fully

>>> into consideration. We didn't bother about the problem statement

>>> because the problem statement does not go into the CPM. We understand that

>>> whichever way we go there would still be some who would not be happy with

>>> the decision. Therefore, we decided to remove the emotional sentiments

>>> asking that we move the policy back into the initial discussion stage, and

>>> we looked at this critically, but we could not find the reason to do this.

>>> We spent about two hours yesterday evaluating every point raised and we

>>> both evaluated the pros and cons extensively on every issue raised and we

>>> narrowed it down before arriving at our decisions.

>>> On the issue of the legacy holders, we all know, and it was also

>>> confirmed to us on the mailing list that legacy holders are not subjected

>>> to the CPM of any of the RIR's. Some misunderstood this initially, and this

>>> was corrected. Can anyone point out any of the other issue(s)that wasn't

>>> addressed? Please let us remove the emotional and personal differences.

>>> *We made sure we followed the CPM to the letter on this issue,* and we

>>> believe that we did our best to bring this issue that has been a pain to

>>> the community laid to rest in a timely manner. As said earlier, whichever

>>> way we go, some would object to it, and we decided to deal with this once

>>> and for all in the best interest of the community with the least possible

>>> pain to the community. You elected us to serve the best interest of the

>>> community while leaving behind emotional issues, and we would continue to

>>> do just as best as we can.

>>>

>>> Co-Chair,

>>> PDWG

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 8:47 AM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <

>>> rpd at afrinic.net> wrote:

>>>

>>>> Hi Moses, all,

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> I feel that there is a fundamental mistake here and I beg you to

>>>> reconsider it.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> You've not waited for the staff confirmation about the reciprocity of

>>>> the Inter-RIR transfers. What happens if now the staff comes back and

>>>> confirms that we can’t decide in our policy what do to in other regions, so

>>>> there is no reciprocity and so, we can’t implement this policy?

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Accordingly, I strongly suggest that you change your mind, following

>>>> section 3.5 of the PDP: “A person who disagrees with the actions taken by

>>>> the Chair(s) shall discuss the matter with the PDWG Chair(s) or with the

>>>> PDWG”.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> The reasons for this are:

>>>>

>>>>    1. The only valid proposal version is the one that is published at

>>>>    the web site and then announced to the list. The authors did changes

>>>>    several times, that aren’t there. As we are discussing version 2, we should

>>>>    have a version 2.x to show those.

>>>>    2. The staff must confirm the reciprocity of the last 2.x version

>>>>    in the list. As indicated in 3.4.3, you can extend the last-call to ensure

>>>>    that this is matched.

>>>>    3. This and other aspects, have been indicated several times by

>>>>    myself and others during the last-call. Those are valid-objections that

>>>>    remain unresolved and if you extend the last-call and agree with the latest

>>>>    changes from the authors, then could make sense, otherwise, it is

>>>>    impossible that you can declare the last-call and still “consensus”.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Regards,

>>>>

>>>> Jordi

>>>>

>>>> @jordipalet

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> El 8/10/20 1:37, "Moses Serugo" <moses.serugo at gmail.com> escribió:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Hello PDWG members,

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Following the last online PPM held on 16th-17th September 2020. Last

>>>> call was announced on 21st September 2020 for the following policy

>>>> proposals.

>>>>

>>>> ·         Board Prerogatives on the PDP

>>>>

>>>> ·         Resource Transfer Policy

>>>>

>>>> This is to further announce that the  last call period for the above

>>>> proposals has ended, based on feedback received from the community and the

>>>> editorial changes made by authors to address community concerns, the

>>>> consensus decision from AFRINIC32 is still maintained.

>>>>

>>>> Co-Chairs will now send a report to the Board recommending ratification

>>>> of the two above proposals in line with CPM 3.0.

>>>>

>>>> Regards,

>>>>

>>>> Co-Chairs

>>>>

>>>> _______________________________________________ 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.

>>>>

>>>> _______________________________________________

>>>> RPD mailing list

>>>> RPD at afrinic.net

>>>> 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

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

>>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> RPD mailing list

>> RPD at afrinic.net

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

>>

>

> _______________________________________________

> 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/20201009/9620f0fa/attachment-0001.html>