[rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal - Hierarchical Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)

[Mark Elkins]

Dear Tshepo,

Your intelligence to my email is quite astounding, all be it, clearly 
artificially answered. I do note that your groups email addresses were 
all born around the same time as well. I believe that you and your token 
fed kin have wasted this community enough time.

I fully support the Policy Proposal - Hier-arch-ical Names for New 
AS-SET's - Draft number two.

I fully support the removal of Artificial Intelligence agents in the RPD 
Mailing list - as it's designed for non-artificial but somewhat 
intelligent or at least experienced (as in the workplace) humans only. 
Please delete yourself.

On 2026/07/19 11:35, Tshepo Masuku wrote:
> Dear Mark,
>
> I disagree with the basis of your support.
>
> The fact that Hendrik, Noah, Seun, and Nishal are familiar names with 
> long experience may make their views worth considering. It does not 
> make those views authoritative, and it does not reduce the validity of 
> objections raised by participants whose names you do not recognise.
>
> Participation is not representation. Familiarity is not mandate. 
> Longevity in a policy process is not ownership of that process.
>
> A mailing list exists so arguments can be examined on their substance. 
> It should not become a reputational hierarchy in which recognised 
> insiders are presumed technically correct and newer or less visible 
> participants are treated as suspect. That would convert an open 
> process into a closed procedural class while preserving the language 
> of community participation.
>
> The same problem appears in the appeal to the other four RIRs. Their 
> adoption is relevant experience, but it does not create authority over 
> AFRINIC. Institutional repetition does not become technical proof 
> merely because the institutions are established and the participants 
> are well known.
>
> You also state that experienced operators would not support a proposal 
> if it greatly complicated their lives. That is not the relevant test. 
> A policy may be convenient for established operators while still 
> expanding registry control, imposing costs on others, or turning a 
> preferred operational convention into a mandatory rule. Those who are 
> most familiar with a system are not always those who bear every 
> consequence of its expansion.
>
> Community stewardship should not mean that a small group of recognised 
> participants may convert its operational preference into compulsory 
> policy for everyone else. The community may discuss, advise, and 
> contribute expertise. It does not become a legislature merely because 
> familiar people agree with one another.
>
> The proper question remains whether the proposal protects a clearly 
> defined technical invariant, whether its benefits are demonstrated, 
> whether its residual risks are understood, and whether mandatory 
> registry enforcement is the minimum proportionate response.
>
> Those questions are not answered by asking who has been in the room 
> longest.
>
> I therefore remain opposed to AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02.
>
> Regards,
> Tshepo
-- 

Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.826010496 <tel:+27826010496>
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260719/093d2bf4/attachment.html>