[rpd] New draft policy proposal PPM Dates AFPUB-2026-GEN-003-DRAFT01

Wed Sep 16 10:53:44 UTC 2026

Hi Jordi,

Just a comment, please see inline below:
----
Sent from my mobile
kindly excuse typos

On Wed, 16 Sept 2026, 3:33 am jordi.palet--- via RPD, <rpd at afrinic.net>
wrote:

> .
>
> Obviously this doesn’t excuse the clear discrimination being done by IETF
> between 1 RIR vs the other 4.
>
> Also note that it is up to AFRINIC staff (or board) to contact IETF to
> change that.
>

SO: It should be up to IETF to contact AFRINIC Board when there is clash as
well, there is no reason to hardcode a commitment in AFRINIC working
document just because of an IETF date clash incidence. If it were other RIR
maybe I would have some sympathy for that and even that should not justify
hardcoding date requirements as AFRINIC always ensure to avoid date clashes
as much as possible.

I will do my best anyway to ensure that the list is the web page is not
> discriminating AFRINIC/AFNOG. I urge the staff and board, and other RPD
> members to complain to the IETF about that, probably reply to all to my
> previous email so it get copied to meeting-planning at ietf.org.
>

SO: You don't have to do the talking anymore Jordi it is not necessary.
Things like these does not have to be lobbied for to be done.

I join others in opposing this policy. Maybe if you get similar policy
proposed at other RIR and it passes we can reconsider.

 Regards

>
> Regards,
> Jordi
>
> @jordipalet
>
> El 16 sept 2026, a las 10:15, Andrew Alston <aa at alstonnetworks.net>
> escribió:
>
> Jordi,
>
> I'd like to point out that even looking at the IETF Clash list - AfriNIC
> is not even on the IETF must not clash list.
>
> According to that list, IETF meetings MUST NOT clash with the following:
>
>
>    - APNIC
>    - APRICOT
>    - ARIN
>    - 3GPP *
>    - ICANN *
>    - IEEE 802 *
>    - ITU-T (selected meetings)*
>    - LACNIC
>    - NANOG
>    - OMA *
>    - RIPE
>    - W3C *
>
> There is a separate list of events they prefer not to clash with but where
> the conflict matters less—and AfriNIC is only on that second list. See
> https://www.ietf.org/meeting/planning/clash-list/
>
> Until such time as other organisations have to do not clash lists - and
> are willing to publish those - and there is reciprocity, I remain opposed
> to this policy.
>
> Andrew
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2026 at 11:05 AM jordi.palet--- via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Responding to several emails on this with a single response.
>>
>> 1) There is no such policy in other RIRs, becuase it was not needed, as
>> didn’t happened such clash. Policy proposals must be both proactive and
>> reactive, which means that sometimes we can see a problem “before” it
>> happens and try to avoid it with a policy proposal. Other times, we react
>> to what already happened, like this one. This doesn’t mean at all, that any
>> RIR is 1st or 2nd or 3rd class. Otherwise, as the policies in the RIRs have
>> differences, we could always state that. No sense, same as the no sense
>> that if the board decides to repeat the clash in the coming years the
>> community have nothing to do against that? For sure that no other RIR will
>> do that, and if they do, the community will reach with similar policy
>> proposals.
>>
>> 2) If you read carefully the proposal, I’ve, on purpose, used “should”
>> and not “must” and also for other events “whenever possible”. So this
>> perfectly allows “emergency” situations.
>>
>> 3) Repeating again, if “other events” are co-located, this is in the
>> proposal “whenever possible”, so it doesn’t disallow it. My view is that
>> the result usually is that the PPM will get less attention that those
>> collocated event if they clash (previous experience in another RIR show
>> it). This is not the same as AIS, as it is a “joint” event, with shared
>> agenda, I don’t see it as a clash - we have this in other RIRs and again,
>> is not a problem, because it is a shared agenda.
>>
>> 4) Of course, if you create clash with other events where few people from
>> Africa take part in, will actually avoid those people to even consider
>> taking part in those!
>>
>> 5) Despite what I’ve said in 2 above, my understanding is that the
>> current PDP and bylaws doesn’t allow “emergency” PPMs. The bylaws call for
>> “the board” will do what they wish, and enforce their actions even if the
>> community doesn’t reach consensus on that. Which, again, in my opinion (I
>> said that many times already) is a terrible mistake, against bottom-up
>> process, and should be corrected, as otherwise, Afrinic will be against the
>> new ICP-2, but this is a topic for another discussion.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jordi
>>
>> @jordipalet
>>
>> El 16 sept 2026, a las 8:30, Ben Roberts - AfriNIC via RPD <
>> rpd at afrinic.net> escribió:
>>
>> +1 Andrew. The nature of these PPM events is that it is necessary to hold
>> them alongside other African events in order to make it worth the trip for
>> what is actually a short meeting. This year we held one PPM alongside the
>> AIS (as has been traditional) and now experimenting with co-locating it
>> alongside AfricaCom which is the biggest African industry event of the
>> year. I would rather we see how the experiment works before introducing
>> policies to tie us in knots by settling to not clash with global meetings
>> that very few people from Africa take part in.
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 16 Sep 2026, at 08:58, Andrew Alston <aa at alstonnetworks.net> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Hi RPD / RPD Chairs,
>>
>> I oppose this policy.   While I believe that AfriNIC should endeavor to
>> ensure that meetings do not clash, the reality is that this is sometimes
>> unavoidable.  Furthermore, I stand to be corrected, but I am unsure if
>> other organisations have such a policy.  Embedding this in our policy
>> manual effectively relegates AfriNIC to second-class status compared to
>> other global organisations that do not have similar policies prohibiting
>> scheduling conflicts with AfriNIC.
>>
>> Furthermore, there may be times when an emergency policy meeting needs to
>> be called to address an urgent issue, and this clause could pose a serious
>> problem in that scenario.
>>
>> To repeat my stance above, I do not doubt the policy's intent, and while
>> clashes should obviously be avoided, but I do not believe that this should
>> be made a rule that restricts the PDP to the scheduling whims of other
>> organisations.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2026 at 6:49 PM Hytham El-Nakhal <hytham at tra.gov.eg>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear PDWG,
>>>
>>>
>>> We have received a new draft policy proposal named PPM Dates with ID
>>> AFPUB-2026-GEN-003-DRAFT01 from author Jordi Palet.
>>>
>>>
>>> The proposal contents are published at: <
>>> https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/afpub-2026-gen-001-draft01>
>>>
>>> https://www.afrinic.net/afpub-2026-gen-003-draft01
>>>
>>>
>>> We encourage you to take some time to go through the proposal contents
>>> and provide feedback as follows: -
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> a) Do you support or oppose the proposal?
>>>
>>>
>>> b) If you oppose the proposal, state your reasons.
>>>
>>>
>>> c) Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
>>>
>>>
>>> d) What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more effective?
>>>
>>>
>>> Kindly, as a way for better following up and archiving, keep the name
>>> and proposal ID in the subject line of your posts.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Haitham el Nakhal & Darwin Da Costa
>>>
>>> AFRINIC PDWG Co-Chairs
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RPD mailing list
>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>
>>
>>
>> **********************************************
>> IPv4 is over
>> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
>> http://www.theipv6company.com
>> The IPv6 Company
>>
>> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
>> confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of
>> the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized
>> disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
>> information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
>> prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the
>> intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or
>> use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including
>> attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal
>> offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this
>> communication and delete it.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>
>
>
> **********************************************
> IPv4 is over
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> http://www.theipv6company.com
> The IPv6 Company
>
> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
> confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of
> the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized
> disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
> information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
> prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the
> intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or
> use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including
> attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal
> offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this
> communication and delete it.
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260916/8c083e8d/attachment-0001.html>