Search RPD Archives
[rpd] IPv4 Inter-RIR Resource Transfers (Comprehensive
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
jordi.palet at consulintel.es
Tue Nov 16 17:16:50 UTC 2021
El 16/11/21 16:39, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> escribió:
I cannot overstate how strongly I agree with the crux of what you are saying. Two minor points of disagreement/qualification
a. The outcome isn't just the the RIR system is pure theatre but rather that the RIR system becomes what can reasonably be described as a cartel and RIRs in that mould become a "criminal organization". Note I am not (lest I find myself with a 4 week ban) alleging that that is the situation at present but rather that unless we very quickly end some very bad ideas within the organization that the outcome is inevitable.
[Jordi] I’m with you on this. If we don’t solve the problem it may happen, I’m not saying it is happening already, at least not in a degree to be considered a cartel at this time.
At the point where someone self-censors because they fear broader censorship if they don’t, the rights of free speech have already been infringed.
Silencing or even moderating dissent is a very slippery slope. Especially when it appears to be done out of spite in reaction to an affirmative defense
expressed against an accusation.
(b) I don't see any reason why Mauritius should not be the domicile of an RIR - certainly compared to Florida (seat of dispute resolution for ARIN) and Virginia (domicile of ARIN) Uruguay, Queensland - and am strongly of the view that sentiment around relocating AFRINIC or reconstituting a new RIR for Africa in a different African state is not to entrench the community lead process and is wholly nonsensical. People seem far to happy to take issue with Mauritius's courts and legal system rather than addressing the problems of Afrinic.
[Jordi] I’m fine with the Mauritius jurisdiction. However, if you read the legal assessment from the previous versions of *all* the policy proposals (new IA’s not yet published, so you need to go to the previous one), AND the proposal that the Board didn’t ratified even if it reached a 99,99% of consensus, you will see that the legal assessment is claiming that some decisions of the community can’t be taken by AFRINIC because they will be against Mauritius law. *AND* this is *NOT* happening in other RIRs! So, either the legal assessment is missing the point, or the bylaws are encroaching the community, or the Mauritius laws have problems that don’t allow the community to be “free” as it should be, or a combination of all that.
That’s not true. Other RIRs have rejected policy proposals because they conflicted with law, were out of scope for Number Resource Policy, and/or posed a material legal risk to the organization. It usually happens in those cases well before a proposal can reach consensus, so you don’t see the level of community involvement against the board decision that you are seeing in this case, but I can pretty much guarantee you that if the equivalent of the board prerogatives proposal were brought into the PDP in any of the other RIRs, it would not survive to implementation, even if it somehow wasn’t killed prior to the consensus process (which is the most likely outcome).
[Jordi] If that happens during the policy discussion, and there are suggestions about how to do it, I’m fine with that. I tend to recall one case in ARIN, never in other RIRs about the Board rejecting a proposal ratification.
Note also that I’d a conference call with the staff, including the legal staff, a few weeks ago (it was openly disclosed in the list), and I reached the same conclusion even before having access to the IAs: the Board is restricted by Mauritius laws which don’t understand what are the resources and the PDP/community.
It doesn’t matter whether the law understands or not. The organization is still subject to the law and still must obey it.
[Jordi] Yes, it matters. If the law is designed in such way that can’t work with our system, then the laws are not supporting our system in that country and if the organization is in another jurisdiction without that problem, then the problem is solved.
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...
More information about the RPD