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

[rpd] AFRINIC PDWG Co-Chair Selection Timeframe

Sylvain Baya abscoco at
Tue Apr 26 22:06:48 UTC 2022

Dear PDWG,
Please find my comments below, inline...

Le mardi 26 avril 2022, Owen DeLong via RPD <rpd at> a écrit :

> On Apr 26, 2022, at 05:02 , Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at> wrote:
> Hummm ! my comments inline
> Le lun. 25 avr. 2022 à 13:27, ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE <
> oloyede.aa at> a écrit :
>> Dear all,
>> I have tried as much as possible not to make a comment but it seems I
>> have to comment on this as I would also be making a comment on the other
>> impunity the board leadership have decided to plunge AFRINIC into recently.
>> 1.  This timeline is not acceptable because I don't know how Co-chairs
>> would emerge via the use of the mailing list.
> We keep repeating ourselves.
> You do know how Policy discussions and decisions are made on the ML, but
> somehow you do not know how the selection of Co-chairs to take on the
> administrative  support role of the Working Group, happens on the same
> mailinglist.
> The PDP provides for this when it comes to policies… It makes no allowance
> for it in regards to the selection of co-chairs.
> I believe this is his point, though he is perhaps being too polite in how
> he expresses it…
> Attempting to select co-chairs on the mailing list is a violation of the
> terms in the CPM.
Hi Owen,
Thanks for your email, brother :-)

...i agree that this time is different than the other;
when the PDWG was leaved without any PDWG's
Chairs to Varying the Process [1].

> If we want to change the selection process,
It's not about a change, it's just a "Pré-Selection"
attempt...through an open discussion.

> then we should have a policy proposal to do so and let the community
> debate, discuss, and ultimately come to consensus (or not) around it.
That's fine! but, again, it's absolutely not actually
about any change in the PDP.

>  Unless and until that happens, the mechanism for selecting co-chairs
> should not be altered ad hoc.

Ok! Let's move forward, as you strongly disagree
to this pré-selection procedure; with reasonable
arguments...imho, the discussion has reached a
point where the PDWG's Chairs should decide what
 they know, they have that power [1]
and they are free to use it at this occasion.
[1]: "3.6  Varying the Process
The process outlined in this document may vary in
 the case of an emergency. Variance is for use
when a one-time waiving of some provision of this
document is required.

The decision to vary the process is taken by a
Working Group Chair.
There must be an explanation about why the
variance is needed.
The review period, including the Last Call, shall
not be less than four weeks.
If there is consensus, the policy is approved and it
must be presented at the next Public Policy Meeting.",Public%20Policy%20Meeting

Please PDWG Chairs, do you want to use your power [1] to support this
*Pré-Selection* procedure?



>>>> [...]


Best Regards !
baya.sylvain[AT cmNOG DOT cm]|<>
Subscribe to Mailing List: <>
#‎LASAINTEBIBLE‬|#‎Romains15‬:33«Que LE ‪#‎DIEU‬ de ‪#‎Paix‬ soit avec vous
tous! ‪#‎Amen‬!»
‪#‎MaPrière‬ est que tu naisses de nouveau. #Chrétiennement‬
«Comme une biche soupire après des courants d’eau, ainsi mon âme soupire
après TOI, ô DIEU!»(#Psaumes42:2)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list