<div dir="auto">Hello All,<div dir="auto">I think we should honestly answer this question, is there a need for AFRINIC to review or audit allocated IP Resources?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">A sincere answer to this question will guide the community and further show the 2 distinct views we have in this community right now. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If we have a majority yes to the question above, as I would naturally expect any business minded individual, then I think the major issue here is <b><font color="#2196f3">how the review or audit is done </font></b>and the <b><font color="#2196f3">penalty meted out to those found guilty of misappropriation of allocated resources</font></b>. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Therefore, instead of opposing this policy outrightly just because of the minority authors (as implied), then let the policy opposers state in clear terms once again what to remove, modify and add as the case may be. (if this is still possible and not too late). </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">That the end users of a resource will be disconnected because an ISP was found to have breached the terms of allocation should not be good reason why this policy should be thrown to the bin</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If there are no plans to circumvent allocated resources, there should not be any reason to be afraid of being audited or reviewed by the organisation that allocated the resources in the first place.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I would rather prefer the policy state clearly how it would handle the <b>unlikely</b> event of breaches not directly caused by the ISP.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I have also seen some questions posted on the list that are yet to be answered by the authors (I may corrected if I'm wrong) . This is not good as well. I want to read responses on how the random selection will take place just as someone asked previously on this list.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Be it as it may, I agree that there are still some grey areas to be corrected in the current PDP, but the entire blame should not be on the Co-Chairs. How about members who wait till just days before on site meetings to post their objections to a policy?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The rough consensus must have been reached by the co-chairs somehow, not because they have been pushed to do so. If there is no way to send this proposal back to the mailing list for discussion, then there is an appeal process that can be used to seek redress just as it has been done before.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Personally, I would have also preferred the policy back to the mailing list for a final time may be, but since the Co-chairs have pushed it to last call, I respect their <b>hard</b> decision to have been reached in the interest of the community. Aggrieved members of the community should use the appeal process to argue their views and stop the unnecessary name calling. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Best! </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Ti</></div><div dir="auto"><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, 8:17 AM Andrew Alston <<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="m_7674620060964367134WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Sorry – I need to correct something in my email below –<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I said there were no _<i>substantive</i>_ changes since the last rejection of this policy – this is inaccurate – there were *<b>NO</b>* - changes – substantive or otherwise – zero – zip – none – as per the website which publishes draft
6<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Andrew<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From: </span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Andrew Alston <<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Saturday, 1 December 2018 at 09:27<br>
<b>To: </b>"<a href="mailto:aleruchichuku@yahoo.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">aleruchichuku@yahoo.com</a>" <<a href="mailto:aleruchichuku@yahoo.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">aleruchichuku@yahoo.com</a>>, Daniel Yakmut <<a href="mailto:yakmutd@googlemail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">yakmutd@googlemail.com</a>>, Daniel Yakmut via RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [rpd] Opposing the last call made on the review policy<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Aleruchi,<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">While I agree with everything you have said – let us also be pragmatic. This policy is pushed by the same crowd that walked to the microphone and agreed at the request of the community to drop another policy, and then reneged on it. This
policy has been rejected, as has the soft landing policy, over and over again – yet the authors do not give a damn about the will of the community or the good of the community. Go and watch the videos of the Mauritian policy meeting – you will notice the
same people involved in what happened there are involved in this policy as well.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The authors have clearly demonstrated that they care not a whit about what this community wants or believes is good for it, they have demonstrated bad faith, and shown that the only thing they care about is shoving something through no
matter the consequence – and the co-chairs have already shown that they either do not understand the concept of consensus – or simply do not care. Fact is – there is precedent on co-chairs being overturned on appeal in another RIR – and when it happened –
the person who was overturned – ceased to be a co-chair. These co-chairs however are insistent on a path that ignores the consensus process, and seem hell bent on forcing a situation where they are overturned – yet again – or failing that forcing AfriNIC
into an untenable and potentially costly process beyond the appeal process.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Reality is – there were _<i>no</i>_ substantive changes to this policy from the last time it was rejected – and the objections to the policy that were stated back then have never been withdrawn, and by lack of changes in the text can be
clearly demonstrated to not have been addressed – this flies in the very face of the definition of consensus – the co-chairs however simply do not care.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Welcome to what our PDP process has become – the bullying of the minority supported by co-chairs who do not understand consensus – to push through agendas that have zero to do with the good of the community and more to do with standing
your ground to prove that you can.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">And btw – before I’m attacked – yes – I have proposed some controversial policies over the years – fact is – all of them were withdrawn when the community wanted that.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Andrew<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From: </span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">aleruchi chuku via RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
<b>Reply-To: </b>"<a href="mailto:aleruchichuku@yahoo.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">aleruchichuku@yahoo.com</a>" <<a href="mailto:aleruchichuku@yahoo.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">aleruchichuku@yahoo.com</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Saturday, 1 December 2018 at 07:02<br>
<b>To: </b>Daniel Yakmut <<a href="mailto:yakmutd@googlemail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">yakmutd@googlemail.com</a>>, Daniel Yakmut via RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rpd@afrinic.net</a>>, rpd List <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [rpd] Opposing the last call made on the review policy</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">It's very sad that this policy still lingers like a nightmare after it has been rejected over and over again. It has consistently bred anger and mistrust.
<u></u><u></u></p>
<div id="m_7674620060964367134yMail_cursorElementTracker_1543636533105">
<p class="MsoNormal">Please for the sake of unity, I will advice the chairs to do what is right by the people. DROP THIS POLICY.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div id="m_7674620060964367134yMail_cursorElementTracker_1543636789715">
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div id="m_7674620060964367134yMail_cursorElementTracker_1543636791763">
<p class="MsoNormal">Cheers<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div id="m_7674620060964367134yMail_cursorElementTracker_1543636794622">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Aleruchi<u></u><u></u></p>
<div id="m_7674620060964367134ymail_android_signature">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/mobile/?.src=Android" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="margin-left:0cm;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:15.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Sat, 1 Dec 2018 at 4:15 am, Daniel Yakmut via RPD<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rpd@afrinic.net</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid #6d00f6 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 15.0pt;margin-top:7.5pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">_______________________________________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
</blockquote></div>