[rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal - Hierarchical Names, for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02), Re: RPD Digest, Vol 222, Issue 42

[Hendrik Visage]

So Nia,

  The first question that comes in my mind: Which AFRICAN network and 
organizations do you represent?
AfriNIC ORG handles? The use of anonymous Emails puts a real question 
mark and does enhance the astrturfing claims.

The 2nd question: When Other RIRs are enforcing it, MANRS are advocating 
it, and it is a good for the Internet/etc. and for running proper 
networks to be a good netizen, why the objections other than vague 
similar objections?by NOT enforcing it, we, AfriNIC are playing in the 
hands of those that does and can use AS-sets in 
less”good-for-the-internet” ways. By Enforcing it for new AS-SETS, 
it just keeps things properly clean from my, being an operator’s point 
of view.


---
Hendrik Visage
Director/Owner
HeViS.Co Systems t/a Envisage Cloud Solutions
hvisage at hevis.co.za
GSM/SMS/Signal: +27-84-612-5345
InstantMessenger: https://t.me/hvisage

On 18 Jul 2026, at 12:44, Nia Petronella wrote:

> Dear PDWG,
>
> I agree with Thandeka and remain opposed to this proposal.
>
> The attempt to dismiss similar objections as “astroturfing” does 
> not answer
> the substance of those objections. Different participants may 
> independently
> reach the same conclusion when a proposal introduces requirements that 
> are
> not supported by demonstrated operational necessity. Similarity of 
> position
> is not evidence of improper coordination.
>
> The relevant question is not who used comparable language, but whether 
> the
> proposal protects a genuine technical invariant such as registry 
> accuracy,
> uniqueness, security, or operational continuity. If it does not, the 
> matter
> should remain with operators and voluntary operational practice.
>
> Participation should be assessed by the quality of the argument, not
> invalidated because several people object on the same principled 
> grounds. A
> mailing list should discuss policy, not police conformity of 
> expression.
>
> For these reasons, I support Thandeka’s objection and maintain my
> opposition to the proposal.
>
> Kind regards,
> Nonhlanhla

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260718/e3383eaf/attachment.html>