[rpd] INTER-RIR TRANSFER POLICIES and the NUMBER RESOURCE SOCIETY

[Owen DeLong]

That was a prior version. The version which was submitted for ratification is reciprocal.

Owen


> On Sep 27, 2021, at 02:29 , Jaco Kroon <jaco at uls.co.za> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I for one am of the firm opinion that consensus has not been reached on
> the policy being ratified, as also shown by the fact that other RIRs
> have indicated it's not reciprocal (which was the main objection against
> it).
> 
> Kind Regards,
> Jaco
> 
> On 2021/09/24 02:43, Owen DeLong via RPD wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sep 23, 2021, at 16:10 , Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi PDWG and CoChairs,
>>> 
>>> I refer you to the attached document send by a representative of  the so-called Number Resource Soceity aka NRS to a good number of resource members.
>>> 
>>> Specifically, pay attention to the point related to Inter-RIR transfer policy.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> <snip>
>>> 1.       Inter transfer policy that will allow one as a member of AFRINIC to be able to sell their resources to other RIR and to get value of their money. Policy allows organization who have unused IP4 address space or ASN to request transfer to a specific qualified recipient in another RIR
>>> <snip>
>>> Ofcourse the statement in the snip above is total bs. 
>> Out of context, it can appear that way, however…
>> 
>> Your snip ignores the fact that the document in question is advocating for the board to ratify the policy.
>> 
>> It is the position of the NRS (and many members of this community) that the proposal properly achieved consensus and should
>> be ratified.
>> 
>> This is a position which has at least as much merit as yours and is supported by the record.
>> 
>>> As you may all remember, the PDWG launched a set of appeals to the AC sometime last year as a result of the former co-chairs mismanagement of the PDP process in regards to the draft proposal termed as "Resource Transfer Policy".
>> I recall that some members of the PDWG launched a set of appeals and that somehow those appeals seem to have resulted in the board deciding to put their thumb heavily on the policy scales and start tampering with the appeals committee in extraordinary ways creating a strong backlash from the community and a great deal of suspicion. I do not recall a consensus call in the community around the idea of launching appeals and I do not recall the PDWG as a group taking any such action as a body.
>> 
>>> As you know, a number of members always suspected that the proponents of that proposal had some ties with the Larus Organisation.
>> This is an absurd statement. Yes, Larus supports the proposal. Yes, some proponents of the proposal have a variety of different connections to Larus in that some are customers of Larus, some are vendors that Larus buys goods and/or services from, some are friends of various Larus employees and contractors, some are recipients of fellowships from the Larus foundation. However, there are also Larus foundation fellows on record opposing the policy and there are many proponents of the proposal with no ties whatsoever to Larus.
>> 
>> Your attempt to defame Larus by implication here is malicious and amounts to an ad hominem attack which is prohibited by the CoC for this list.
>> 
>>> With the above background, I would like to categorically state to the PDWG that with TIME, all intentions and motives often come out.
>> Will yours?
>> 
>>> Most importantly, as a PDWG participant, I would like to know if the new lobbying being done by the NRS.HELP is inline with the PDP.
>> First, the letter to which you are referring is not lobbying, it is an attempt to recruit stakeholders to join NRS.HELP as members of the organization in an effort to be a more multi-stakeholder organization.
>> 
>> You are like the Americans that complain about the NRA, but don’t join it. The NRA is a membership organization with dues. If enough anti-gun Americans joined the NRA, they could reverse its position on gun control almost instantly.
>> 
>> NRS.HELP is a membership organization that costs nothing to join. If you want to have a say in what NRS.HELP does, feel free to join. As a membership organization, if enough members want to push it in a particular direction, it cannot resists.
>> 
>> Is the lobbying occurring at a PDWG meeting or on the rpd mailing list? Is the lobbying happening within the confines of anything governed by the PDP?
>> 
>> What is your exact basis for implying that NRS.HELP recruiting is somehow subject to the rules of the PDP?
>> 
>> IMHO, your call here would be similar to my attempting to asking if your activities in Nigeria are inline with US law. Who cares? US law has no jurisdiction in Nigeria and the PDP has nothing to do with the recruiting efforts of a Hong Kong NGO.
>> 
>>> I would like to know if at all, the PDWG and its PDP is no longer useful and if resource members will now be determining policies NRS style and not the internet community through an open bottomup PDP.
>> I think you have truly gone off the rails here. NRS.HELP is a forum for discussion. It is not a policy making body and it is not intended to be a policy making body.
>> 
>> Yes, NRS.HELP will advocate for the positions and policies its members want, but when advocating, it will do so within the confines of the established policy development processes in the existing policy development fora.
>> 
>> I must wonder where you got the idea that NRS.HELP is intended to be some form of alternative policy body.
>> 
>> Owen
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd