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

[rpd] Last Call - Abuse Contact Policy Update AFPUB-2018-GEN-001-DRAFT07.

PDWG Chair vincent at
Thu Jun 24 21:17:00 UTC 2021


*Dear PDWG*


We refer to the appeal that has been lodged against the decision of the
AFRINIC PDWG Co-Chairs in respect of the policy proposal bearing the
name ‘Abuse Contact Policy Update’  and ID [AFPUB-2018-GEN-001-DRAFT07].

In order to allow the Appeal Committee to perform its duty without any
influence from discussions being held on the present mailing list, we
consider it appropriate to suspend all deliberations on this draft
policy proposal pending the outcome of the appeal.


Vincent Ngundi & Darwin Da Costa



On 08/06/2021 17:04, PDWG Chair wrote:


> Dear PDWG,


> Following the commencement of the Last Call period on 5th June 2021,

> we have noted some concerns that have been raised by some members of

> the PDWG. As Co-Chairs, and following a review and analysis of the

> responses, we have concluded that all the concerns raised have been

> adequately addressed by either the author of this policy proposal, or

> by other members of the PDWG.


> We therefore encourage participants to engage in, and pursue, any

> editorial changes to the policy proposal as well as any contentious

> issues that are objective and founded on proper justifications.


> We also remind the community to adhere to the AfriNIC Code of Conduct

> ( in order to ensure that our

> deliberations remain professional, respectful and appropriate at all

> times.


> Finally, we wish to inform the PDWG that the Last Call period closes

> on 19th June 2021 at 2359UTC.


> Regards,

> Vincent Ngundi & Darwin Da Costa



> On 08/06/2021 13:29, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:


>> Hi Mimi,


>> Can you justify why is poorly placed?


>> AFRINIC existing abuse policy is not mandatory, and it has been

>> demonstrated by staff provided data, that, as a consequence, it

>> doesn’t work.


>> The proposal also allow multiple channels, is not stating that you

>> don’t have further data such as phone or whatever, it is just

>> mandating to have at least email. So, the “two-channels” that you

>> mention are still possible.


>> Personal data is not allowed in Mauritius, so all the channels must

>> take that in consideration, and the proposal allows that.


>> It is simple and in fact, there are open-source tools, such as

>> fail2ban, that can handle the automation and provide multiple

>> channels automatically. For example, you could call up to send an

>> automated response in first place that explains the one submitting

>> the report that you handle automatically (and consequently much

>> faster) cases submitted according to a standard format such as

>> X-ARF/RFC5965/RFC6650. Then you can try to parse the data if other

>> formats are used and if that’s not possible, an alternative automated

>> email could tell the reporter that a manual handling is required and

>> create a ticket, contact him by email or other channels, etc.


>> Note that all this is something that each network can freely decide

>> (so internal operational details), and still comply with the proposal

>> and definitively will help all the parties, but all that need a

>> framework, as set by this proposal, to ensure that the email is working.


>> And, no it doesn’t create a duplicate CPM content, because basically

>> the one that we have is not useful at all, so we need to improve it.


>> The basis of the PDP is to evolve as we learn. If we try to use the

>> excuse of “we already have something in the CPM for that”, then we

>> will never have a better CPM and learnings along the time will be wasted.


>> Regards,


>> Jordi


>> @jordipalet


>> El 7/6/21 23:43, "Mimi dy" <dym5328 at

>> <mailto:dym5328 at>> escribió:


>> Hi everyone,


>> Since the PDWG co-chairs announced the official start of the last

>> call period for the *Abuse Contact Policy, *I find it essential to

>> call out the community, so they become aware of the limitations of

>> the proposed policy, which unfortunately, reached rough consensus.


>> To some extent, some people might think that the proposed policy

>> makes sense and can see potential in improving the service quality of

>> AFRINIC, by providing functional abuse-c information, increasing

>> accountability among resource-holders, offering an appropriate

>> platform/ contact for complainants to submit their complaints and

>> reducing the related expenditure. Nonetheless, I simply do not agree

>> with it, why? Because its pillars are poorly placed, and more

>> importantly, AFRINIC’s existing abuse contact information policy is

>> sufficient and very well-designed. To emphasize and clarify my point

>> of view, the existence of two channels or abuse contacts is highly

>> efficient. The automated mailbox can manage recurrent and frequent

>> complaints, by providing automatic solutions and direct answers

>> already incorporated in their database. On the other hand, the

>> personal communication contact can handle much more complex

>> complaints, requiring human intervention to suggest solutions or

>> further actions. Consequently, I am convinced that both channels are

>> of extreme necessity in handling abuse complaints and providing

>> victims with diverse ways to deal with unfortunate situations. Also,

>> we cannot deny that it saves AFRINIC’s efforts trying to create an

>> abuse-c attribute all over again, and it prevents the members’ from

>> wasting precious time developing useless policies, that are only a

>> duplicate of the CPM policies, and initiating the long procedures of

>> approval and ratification.


>> I wish that, during this last call period, more members will contest

>> the rough consensus that this policy reached, based on what I

>> logically maintained above.


>> Warmly.


>> _______________________________________________ RPD mailing list

>> RPD at



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

>> IPv4 is over

>> Are you ready for the new Internet ?


>> 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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list