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

[rpd] A question for the PDWG

Fernando Frediani fhfrediani at
Tue May 24 15:21:24 UTC 2022

Hello Mike

I don´t know who invented thins thing of ICP-2 not applicable to any 
RIRs after  its creating as it became a lawless organization that can do 
anything they like regardless all the rest of worldwide Internet community.

What is the sense to requiring some quiet strict and strong principles 
like Bottom-up self-governance and after the creating of a RIR it can 
transform itself in whatever they like contrary to those principles and 
trash away the everything that was mandatory for its creation at 23:59h 
? It is like stimulating an anarchic system and put in danger the 
interests of a large amount of people.
Maye it is very comfortable for some people in control for some RIRs to 
go into that direction as they would feel more comfortable to do 
whatever they like unsupervised but it doesn't work like that.

Bottom-up governance means members and community, actual Internet 
actors, potential new actors and its users, not only members and the 
balance between a Board which is basically membership and its PDP which 
is community is always a wise thing.

Any RIR that eventually doesn't comply with ICP-2 should be brought up 
to spot, and discussions should be raised in ICANN up to it Board as 
well in all other RIRs in order to stop recognizing that RIR.


On 24/05/2022 11:51, Mike Silber wrote:
> Hi Jordi
>> On 24 May 2022, at 16:41, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 
>> <jordi.palet at> wrote:
>> Hi Mike,
>> While this is debatable, the parts of the bylaws that are broken, 
>> where already broken when those bylaws were created in order to 
>> constitute AFRINIC to comply with the ICP-2.
> I don’t see any basis for debate here. Once an RIR is established - 
> ICP-2 essentially ceases to have any legal or compliance relevance and 
> simply has moral guidance.
>> As a consequence, the recognition of AFRINIC could be declared 
>> invalid, because **was not** complying with “*3) Bottom-up 
>> self-governance structure for setting local policies”.*
> Respectfully, there is no basis for any such declaration of 
> invalidity? Who would declare it invalid: ICANN or a court? If a court 
> - in which jurisdiction? If ICANN - based on what provision of the 
> ICANN by-laws?
> Please give a real example of how such declaration of invalidity - 
> otherwise this is just FUD.
>> I will prefer not to go that direction, but this means that broken 
>> thins should be fixed, not ignored by the Board every time we come to 
>> the same conclusions. I guess you (others) will agree with me that it 
>> is necessary to fix whatever is found broken?
> Quite happy to agree that the bylaws can be improved, but it has 
> nothing to do with ICP-2.
> Regards
> Mike
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list