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

[NP Petronella]

Hi Hendrik,

I will keep this concise.

Tshepo acknowledged a narrow benefit: hierarchical naming can prevent new flat-name creation within AFRINIC and improve attribution at creation time. He did not concede that DRAFT02 is sufficiently clear, predictable, or ready for adoption.

The remaining objection concerns the exception rule. The proposal prohibits new flat names, but then allows exceptions “where necessary” without defining the qualifying circumstances, required evidence, decision standard, review process, or appeal mechanism. The original wording said exceptions must be allowed, while the staff wording says they may be granted. Those are materially different rules.

The operational problem is straightforward: two identical restoration requests could receive different outcomes depending on staff judgment. An operator cannot determine its entitlement from the policy text, and “escalate the matter later” is not a predictable policy safeguard.

There is no contradiction in supporting a predictable naming default while objecting to an undefined discretionary exception. Nor is asking for objective criteria a demand for greater administrative control. It is precisely the opposite: objective conditions limit AFRINIC’s discretion and allow decisions to be tested consistently.

So the position remains clear:

Hierarchical naming offers a limited prospective improvement. That improvement does not resolve the undefined exception boundary or the conflicting normative wording.

I will not engage with the personal remarks concerning humans, AI, or anyone’s honesty. They do not answer the drafting issue.

I support Tshepo and remain opposed to DRAFT02 as presently written.

Regards,
Nonhlanhla


________________________________
From: Hendrik Visage <hvisage at hevis.co.za>
Sent: Thursday, 30 July 2026 09:34:59
To: NP Petronella <NPertuniaPetronella at outlook.com>
Cc: rpd at afrinic.net <rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal - Hierarchical Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)


On 30 Jul 2026, at 9:08, NP Petronella wrote:

Hi Hendrik,

I do not believe Tshepo’s position is contradictory, and I support his objection.

Which parts of the objections that he hasn’t conceded too?

Nor is the choice simply between DRAFT02 and “zero protection.”

Hmmm… did Tshepo himself showed WHY this protection is needed?

The broader objection therefore remains valid: the proposal creates a mandatory naming restriction

YEs, which the rest of the RIRs also agrees too.

and then relies on discretionary exceptions to address the operational problems caused by that restriction.

What Operational problems?
Please be terse and concise in showing all those you claim but haven’t yet show as per my Q7 that’s unanswered.

That is not predictability.

The CURRENT STATE is UNpredictability (As Tshepo himself showed!), you now, on a predictable naming proposal claim UNpredictability as part of your object? That same Predictability that Tshepo in lots of many words gave the same conclusion after I re-read his emails this morning?

Please be again terse and concise in showing the two differences, given Tshepo’s concessions showing the current state’s problems himself that you are proposing predictable and not to stay with unpredictable given your own super-predictability requirements that wasn’t completely agreed on in other previous discussions nor other RIRs that have much beter predictability using the exact same mechanism, than AfriNIC has today given your opposition to predictability just to stay in a UNpredictable current state in your objection to the much more predictable DRAFT02? (I don’t expect humans to understand this paragraph)

It is administrative control presented as flexibility.

I’ll call that what it is AGAINST Claude and ChatGPT’s advice and after I fired my lawyer given his response to reading my email:

Nonhlanhla: I’ll state that, unless you can beyond ANY DOUBT prove the contrary, that is so far from the truth I smell it’s badness from the other side of the city with the storm strength down winds.

Firstly: it is NOT flexibility as you might claim, that is the first part of the lie, as it’s making things LESS-flexible, ie. you MUST include an ASN in the AS-SETs

Next: Administrative control??? But you and your fellow objecters WANT a full blown-no-exceptions-god-like-no-errors-everything-guaranteed atomic operations type administrative control??

I’ll state it plainly for the humans reading: That sentence is contradictory to the rest of the emails by the objecters.

But, since you are going to propose an properly written rewording of the proposal you are objecting too, PLEASE SHOW using operational examples and terms in excruciatingly terse details how you dream up that contradictory line given the rest of your email that sorta object to the counter points?

For these reasons, I support Tshepo and continue to object to the proposal as written.

Just a clarification again, which parts of his objections that he has NOT conceded to others nor shown in his own words the case FOR the proposal again, I’m confused now by the swapping of arguments.

Yours operationally needing the hierarchical AS-SETs
Hendrik
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260730/0b082691/attachment-0001.html>