<p dir="ltr">Hello Seun and All</p>
<p dir="ltr">1. What are some of the specific challenges facing AfriNIC that this policy seeks to address other than the general problem of outdated POC NOT responding to correspondences?</p>
<p dir="ltr">Is it challenges to communication of annual membership fees renewal invoices?</p>
<p dir="ltr">Is it challenges of no response to ABUSE request information?</p>
<p dir="ltr">I believe the current specifics should be stated to see how best the policy can be discussed / debated to tackle the issues.</p>
<p dir="ltr">2. I will like to see "may" in all the clauses changed to "shall" or "will" to leave no room for ambiguity or misinterpretation. In other words to be explicit as to action to be taken.</p>
<p dir="ltr">3. I believe policies when ratified are guidelines we all agree to. Let us not leave anything to AfriNIC or staff of AfriNIC be it "at their discretion" or "internal process" where these may become subjective to flaws and personal interpretation or double standards. What are the current methods of communication used to reach members? E-mail? Phone call? SMS? Snail mail? Perhaps a policy in this direction to be referenced by all other communication processes.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Again I site an example of a "90 day application expiry" as a so called "internal process" which is contrary to what is defined in RSA and staff of AfriNIC fail to communicate to applicant. This the applicant had to threaten with legal address before changes to decision was made recently.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Let's endeavour to make standard Policies (thorough) that will leave little decisions disguised as "AfriNIC staff discretion" or "internal process" that can make interpretation of the policies biased.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Cheers</p>
<p dir="ltr">Kofi</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On May 18, 2014 3:57 PM, "Seun Ojedeji" <<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr">Dear members,</p>
<p dir="ltr">We have received a new policy - "AfriNIC Whois Database Update Process" (AFPUB-2014-GEN-001-DRAFT-01)<br></p><p dir="ltr">While
this may not be on the agenda of the next public policy meeting, we
encourage the community to discuss this on the list and at the upcoming
face to face meeting. Public url to the "draft" policy will soon be made
available. However the content is pasted below for comments and
discussion from the PDWG/community.</p>
<p dir="ltr">____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________<br></p><p dir="ltr">Draft Policy name: AfriNIC Whois Database Update Process<br>Unique identifier: AFPUB-2014-GEN-001-DRAFT-01<br>
Status: New<br>
Submission Date 15 MAY 2014<br>Author:Jean Robert Hountomey <br></p><br><div>
1.Summary of the Problem Being Addressed by this Policy Proposal<br>
<br>
The African network infrastructure is growing with changes and
extensions. This growth has brought changes in telecommunication
and Internet infrastructure. With the emergence of new
operators, mergers and acquisitions, the dynamism brought by the
penetration of Internet technology has required organizational
changes with job rotation. The need for accurate whois data has
been in the news for years all over the world.<br>
<br>
Inaccurate data is still present in the AfriNIC whois database
because changes have occurred in organizations (point of
contact, contact information etc.) and object owners have not
updated their records. The result is a “No response” from
“whois” contacts listed in the AfriNIC Database.<br>
<br>
The goal of the proposal is setting a process towards ensuring
that AfriNIC whois database is updated. A previous policy
(AFPUB-2012-GEN-001-DRAFT-02 : AfriNIC Whois Database Clean-up
) was withdrawn by the Author after AfriNIC advised that there
was already an internal process to handle the cleanup of whois
data and do general contact update. However it has been noticed
that objects in AfriNIC database are not accurate.<br>
<br>
2. Summary of How this Proposal Addresses the Problem<br>
<br>
This proposal asks AfriNIC to maintain accuracy through a
periodical database clean up. Furthermore, at least <br>
once a year or at the renewal of resources, AFRINIC staff should
conduct a whois database information validation.<br>
<br>
3. The Proposal<br>
<br>
AfriNIC members are committed through the RSA to maintain their
data and keep it accurate. AfriNIC will then <br>
maintain accuracy of whois information through periodical
database clean up or update. AfriNIC will periodically ask
object <br>
owners in the Whois Database to actively check and update the
accuracy of data in AfriNIC whois database.<br>
<br>
3.1 Cleanup<br>
<br>
3.1.1 - General Database Cleanup: At the ratification of this
policy, AfriNIC staff will conduct a first cleanup by asking all
POC present except those who received their objects in less than
a year to confirm their POC information. We leave to AfriNIC
staff the discretion to use any communication tool they find
useful for this action.<br>
<br>
3.1.2 - Annual Clean up: After the first cleanup, AfriNIC will
conduct a cleanup once a year. We leave to AfriNIC's staff to
define the period.<br>
<br>
3.1.3 - At the request of additional resources or services,
AfriNIC staff will ask the organization to update its records.<br>
<br>
3.2. If a change is requested by another policy.<br>
<br>
In case another AfriNIC policy made mandatory a change or
introduce another object, the object owner is required to make
this update.<br>
<br>
3.2 Steps<br>
<br>
3.2.1 - AfriNIC staff will ask members to confirm accuracy of
their records in the Whois database in a month’s <br>
timeframe when contacted by email.<br>
<br>
3.2.2 - After one month, AfriNIC Staff will use any
communication tools at their discretion to contact <br>
those who have not answered or those whose email has bounced
back.<br>
<br>
3.2.3 - After another month of unresponsive response, the
record will be marked invalid.<br>
<br>
3.2.4 - AfriNIC may publish publicly a report about number
resources with invalid POC.<br>
<br>
3.2.5 -
One year after the first contact initiation, if the data is
still not accurate and the organization has failed to respond to
the call to resolve the data inconsistency, AfriNIC may
claim the number resources back.<br>
<br>
4. Situation within other RIRs<br>
<br>
- ARIN conducts an annual POC (point of contact) validation
process: <br>
<a href="https://www.arin.net/resources/services/poc_validation.html" target="_blank">https://www.arin.net/resources/services/poc_validation.html</a><br>
- At APNIC, there was a similar policy proposed that did not
reach consensus and was withdrawn by the author. <br>
<a href="http://www.apnic.net/__data/assets/file/0006/22857/prop-084-v002.txt" target="_blank">http://www.apnic.net/__data/assets/file/0006/22857/prop-084-v002.txt</a>
<br>
- RIPE NCC<br>
<a href="http://www.ripe.net/data-tools/support/clean-up-of-unreferenced-data" target="_blank">http://www.ripe.net/data-tools/support/clean-up-of-unreferenced-data</a><br>
- LACNIC obligates the resources holders contractually throught
their RSA and reviews whois data when resources are requested
and updates accordingly<br>
<br>
<p style="text-align:justify"><b>History</b></p>
</div><ul style="text-align:justify"><li>02 Oct. 2012 - AFPUB-2012-GEN-001-DRAFT-02 was withdrawn
by the Author.</li></ul>
<p style="text-align:justify"><b>Previous Versions </b></p>
None<br><br clear="all">Kind Regards,<br>
<br>
Seun Ojedeji, Emile Milandou<br>
PDWG Co-Chairs<br></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
rpd mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div>