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

[rpd] [Community-Discuss] Call for AFRINIC’s registry service migration to other RIRs

Sun Aug 1 21:03:38 UTC 2021

Hi Owen,

I need to disagree with some of your points here.

The transfer proposal was wrongly managed by the chairs, I’m convinced that they did in good faith. A proposal, can’t return once and again with non-editorial changes to the discussion and sustain the consensus decision.

There is no discussion about that. An independent re-call committee decided that, despite the numerous warnings, the chairs continued interpreting the PDP in their own way.

Further to that, not sure to understand way, the actual chairs haven’t resent the proposal report to the Board because, we like it or not, reached consensus (according to the previous chairs decision) to the board for ratification.

I believe the chairs are interpreting, wrongly in my opinion, that they shall “hold” a proposal under appeal, until the AC takes a decision. I’m convinced, as other members of the community, that it is in the hands of the Board to hold the ratification until the appeal is resolved, not the chairs.

Could the chairs explain how they can interpret that they shall not send a proposal for ratification because it is under appeal or if they are still working on the report? (I understood they will finish it by end of June)




El 1/8/21 21:49, "Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss" <community-discuss at> escribió:

On Aug 1, 2021, at 12:21 , Noah <noah at> wrote:

On Sun, 1 Aug 2021, 20:47 Owen DeLong, <owen at> wrote:

On Aug 1, 2021, at 06:06 , Noah <noah at> wrote:

On Sun, 1 Aug 2021, 15:43 Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss, <community-discuss at> wrote:

Let those who wish to run the risks of staying with AfriNIC through this situation do so

- let those who choose not to accept the risk profile transfer out - problem solved.


PS: confusion of the highest order.

Who is confused, Noah?

Andrew who penned down that failed Inbound Transfer Policy Proposal in 2016 and today was suggesting an Outbound transfer policy to move IPv4 space out of AFRINIC service region. There is some confusion there.

I don’t think he’s confused, I think you fail to recognize a: the context in which he penned that 2016 proposal and b: the ways in which circumstances have changed today.

Personally, I think the simpler and more expedient thing would be for the board to merely ratify

the existing consensus RTP,

Says Owen who recently on Thu Jul 29 01:22:17 UTC 2021 cautioned the same AFRINIC board from ratifying a proposal under some appeal.

Yes… Difference is that there’s arguably no valid appeal standing against RTP.

Co-chairs declared consensus.

Appeal submitted

Co-chairs returned proposal to list for further community input.

Consensus was confirmed by the community and again confirmed by co-chairs. Thus this consensus declaration was not the subject of the previous appeal.

Proposal submitted to board fro ratification after second consensus call.

I refer you to the archives

Jordi > I’ve submitted several appeals, so I know very well that only patience is needed.

Owen: I would think you, of all people, would understand the need for the board to at least acknowledge the appeal and provide some assurance that it will not ratify a policy that should be under appeal.

Jordi > The Board will not be able to ratify a policy under appeal until the appeal is resolved. That’s it.

Owen: Normally, I would agree with you. However, in the face of recent events, I am unwilling to place so much faith in
this current board.

Is it safe to say that you Owen is equally confused.

Nope… But apparently I was right about you being confused. You seem to fail to grasp the difference in circumstance for the two policies you mention above.

but Andrew’s suggestion could also mitigate risks for members.

It remains Andrew's personal opinion and not the consensus of 75% of the membership base.

How did you measure this 75%’s opinions? Please do tell.

Further, what do members have to do with policy? Policy is under the control of the community. Members get control of the board and the bylaws.


_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss 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.

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

More information about the RPD mailing list