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

[rpd] Criteria for Eligibility or Selection of PDWG Co-Chairs

Fiona Asonga tespok at
Fri Feb 19 08:17:08 UTC 2021

Totally in agreement with the now 6 criteria.


----- Original Message -----

From: "Sunday Folayan" <sfolayan at>
To: "Mike Silber" <silber.mike at>, "Noah" <noah at>
Cc: "AfriNIC List" <rpd at>
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2021 10:47:54 AM
Subject: Re: [rpd] Criteria for Eligibility or Selection of PDWG Co-Chairs

I am OK with Noah's trajectory, proposition, and Mike's modification.

Slight edit in 4. "which is am AFRINIC resource members" should read "who is an AFRINIC resource member"

I also think we should add ...

6. Ability to remain calm in the face of provocation and respect for the continental diversity.

On 2/19/21 7:38 AM, Mike Silber wrote:

Thanks Noah

I think that is an excellent list.

The only thing I would add to your point 5 is an intangible quality - a history (or perception) of building consensus. Some of us understand RFC 7282, but because of our passion, style or language are less successful (or perceived as less successful) at moving the group towards consensus.



On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 at 07:54, Noah < noah at > wrote:


Hi PDWG participants,

Could we as a WG participants agree on a set of criteria for a WG participant to become a co-chair.

This I believe is more important and I had shared some few ideas below a separate thread but I think it would make sense to work this out on this new thread.

Some thoughts that crossed my mind as criteria;

1. Active participation in WG discussions by a participant, in say, the past 3 years.

2. Participant should demonstrate a clear understanding of the CPM and especially sections that relate to the PDWG.

3. Participant should have some 5 years sound technical experience in this space with a clear understanding of Internet Protocol and preferably having worked in this space.

4. Affiliation with an entity which is am AFRINIC resource members could come in handy for a participant interested in chairing policy discussions.

5. Understanding of rfc7282 and what rough consensus and consensus is all about, after all consensus is a path and not a destination. This is very important.

Other participants in this WG can also add and we see what criteria are more required and which ones to discard to keep it simple.

I stand to be corrected but I think we as a WG have an obligation to first sort this requirements out before we can think of the selection of the interim co-chairs.

RPD mailing list
RPD at

RPD mailing list RPD at


RPD mailing list
RPD at

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: mail_signature-01.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 66589 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list