[rpd] RPD Digest, Vol 222, Issue 81

[Nia Petronella]

Dear PDWG,

A pattern is becoming clear: familiar names are treated as authoritative,
while newer participants are questioned, graded, or dismissed.

That is gatekeeping, not consensus.

An open process should test arguments, not reputations. Participation is
evidence and objection; being well known does not create a mandate to
decide whose voice counts.

Regards,
Nonhlanhla

On Mon, 20 Jul 2026, 9:35 am <rpd-request at afrinic.net> wrote:

> Send RPD mailing list submissions to
>         rpd at afrinic.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         rpd-request at afrinic.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         rpd-owner at afrinic.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of RPD digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Subject: Re: [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical
>       Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02) (Thulisile
> Mazomba)
>    2. Re: [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical Names
>       for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02) (Tshepo Masuku)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 07:24:43 +0000
> From: Thulisile Mazomba <219280444 at mycput.ac.za>
> To: Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz>, "rpd at afrinic.net"
>         <rpd at afrinic.net>
> Cc: "rpd-owner at afrinic.ne" <rpd-owner at afrinic.ne>
> Subject: [rpd] Subject: Re: [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ?
>         Hierarchical Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)
> Message-ID:
>         <
> GVXPR04MB12291FB9551CD3D0ADB433FE6D1C32 at GVXPR04MB12291.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> An improvement is not automatically a justification for mandatory policy.
>
> The question is whether the benefit is significant enough, proven enough,
> and proportionate enough to place in the registry?s compulsory layer.
> Saying ?it helps? does not answer that.
>
> And no, raising those questions does not mean the objection came first. It
> means policy power should be tested before it is expanded.
>
> I remain opposed.
>
> Regards,
> Thulisile
> ________________________________
> From: Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz>
> Sent: Monday, 20 July 2026 06:36:00
> To: Thulisile Mazomba <219280444 at mycput.ac.za>; rpd at afrinic.net <
> rpd at afrinic.net>
> Cc: rpd-owner at afrinic.ne <rpd-owner at afrinic.ne>
> Subject: Re: [rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical Names
> for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)
>
> Hi,
>
> On 7/19/2026 11:29 PM, Thulisile Mazomba wrote:
> >
> > Hi Frank,
> >
> > You appear to be treating your disagreement with an objection as proof
> > that no technical objection exists.
> >
> > The proposal prevents one naming collision. It does not establish the
> > correctness of the routing data attached to that name,
>
> The proposal does not fix *all* problems. and it doesn't claim to do so.
> It creates an improvement.
> I don't agree that it is ok to object just because this proposal does
> not fix *all* problems.
>
> Do you agree it provides improvements?
>
> > nor prove that
> > mandatory registry control is the only proportionate remedy.
>
> it's not intended to prove that.
>
> >
> > Those are technical and policy questions. Declaring them invalid does
> > not resolve them.
> They are not good reasons against the proposal.
>
> But some people maybe want to be against the proposal first and then are
> looking for "questions".
>
> Frank
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260720/a7286772/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 07:34:21 +0000
> From: Tshepo Masuku <TshepoMasuku26 at hotmail.com>
> To: "rpd at afrinic.net" <rpd at afrinic.net>, "geier at geier.ne.tz"
>         <geier at geier.ne.tz>
> Subject: Re: [rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical
>         Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)
> Message-ID:
>         <
> VI2PR04MB10545520811A7499ACFFB1239CAC32 at VI2PR04MB10545.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> You keep positioning yourself as the referee of which objections count.
>
> That is not your role. Participants are allowed to question whether a
> useful change belongs in mandatory policy. Dismissing those concerns
> instead of answering them turns discussion into gatekeeping.
>
> A policy room may debate. It does not grant any participant authority to
> police dissent.
>
> I remain opposed.
>
> Regards,
> Tshepo
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260720/0cd4be0c/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of RPD Digest, Vol 222, Issue 81
> ************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260720/96fd892d/attachment.html>