<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jul 21, 2020, at 05:58 , Fernando Frediani <<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" class="">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 21/07/2020 02:06, Owen DeLong wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:4DFB7B84-EB2D-4CA6-A292-B01E55641BC9@delong.com" class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
Yes, but that proposal could be to vary the chair election process
just as much as to vary anything else in the document.</blockquote><p class="">Yes, as long it is conducted under a policy proposal discussion
following 3.6 no problem at all.</p><p class="">Now the main problem I guess is to reach consensus on something
as many people seem too afraid of anything. So why I suggested
something strictly simple that resolves the current scenario, even
temporarily until we can have a proper proposal discussed later
that resolves it long term.</p><p class="">However some people keep suggesting to extend the Co-Chair term
without willing to go through a simple show of hands in a remote
event as the PDP says. So how we suppose to do this? Regardless
the type of job the person is doing there is not other way to
extend his term other than the process outlined in the PDP.<br class=""></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>The problem is that such a suggestion is just as equally prohibited under the CPM as any other. Even that would require a policy proposal to reach consensus through the 4 week process outlined in 3.6.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Owen</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class=""><p class="">
</p><p class="">I don't see any other ways out of it.<br class="">
</p><p class="">Fernando<br class="">
</p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:4DFB7B84-EB2D-4CA6-A292-B01E55641BC9@delong.com" class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Owen</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><p class="">Fernando<br class="">
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 21/07/2020 00:05, Owen
DeLong wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:1D3C0969-FC3F-4C21-A7FE-012AD60CEFCF@delong.com" class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8" class="">
<br class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Jul 20, 2020, at 6:22 PM, Fernando
Frediani <<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div class=""><p class="">Hi Owen. Sorry I don't really read
the 3.6 the same way as you. 3.6 in my view
wasn't thought for situation like this. It's
being glued for the occasion that's not the
case. 3.6 is about how the proposals are
conducted, reviewed and passed within this
forum in a exceptional situation (pretty much
where we are). All points mentioned there have
to do with proposals. We are not discussing or
advancing a proposal right now.<br class="">
</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
That’s your special interpretation. It’s not what a
plain english reading of the language says.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">1.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The
PDP is in the document containing 3.6. The PDP is a
process.</div>
<div class="">2.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The
co-chair election process is in the document
containing 3.6. The co-chair election process is a
process.</div>
<div class="">3.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>3.6
says “The process outlined in this document…”.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div><p class="">What CAN actually be done within 3.6
is someone to properly present a proposal to
amend the PDP and fix the issues we are
discussing here and then have this proposal
treated under 3.6 (with no less than 4 weeks
including the Last Call - which coincides with
your point number 3 below).</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
I suppose that could also work, though it’s rather
indirect and adds (unnecessary IMHO) complexity.<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><p class="">In my opinion proposal
AFPUB-2019-GEN-007-DRAFT01 is ready for it,
but I guess that may not reach consensus. So a
much shorter proposal with just the essential
we need to resolve this situation is the way
to go under 3.6. Would that match with what
you are trying to put ?<br class="">
</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
IMHO, AFPUB-2019-GEN-007-DRAFT01 is a fatally flawed
proposal and I would not support it as currently
written.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I think a much more direct proposal to
clarify an expanded scope of 3.6 (closer to my
interpretation instead of your rather narrow
interpretation) would be the most likely to gain
consensus, frankly. I think such is unnecessary, but
_IF_ you insist on the (oddly) narrow interpretation
of 3.6 you have put forth, then…</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Owen</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div><p class="">Fernando<br class="">
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 20/07/2020
21:52, Owen DeLong wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:9418E82A-1159-498D-ABEB-6AE4CC3DAD8E@delong.com" class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<br class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Jul 20, 2020, at 10:00
AM, Fernando Frediani <<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On
20/07/2020 13:39, Owen DeLong wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CE966FE8-5868-492C-91B0-B1A6B36CE4BA@delong.com" class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<br class="">
<div class=""><clip>
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
This is an absurd claim. The
standard (as you mention below) is
a “raise of hands” vote. This
mechanism even in person does not
allow people to verify that their
vote was cast correctly, nor is it
fully auditable (indeed, it has no
audit trail and is not at all
audible).</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Placing more stringent
requirements than exist on the
current system as an acceptance
criteria for a system deployed
urgently in a time of crisis makes
little sense to me.</div>
</blockquote>
You are not making the things easier
given the circumstances and all has
been been discussed here.<br class="">
What is being said is analogous to
raise of hand and is also a
indisputable way to eliminate most
possible fraud that have been pointed.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
It is not my goal to make things easier for
you or even necessarily easier in general.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">It is my goal to achieve the
best possible outcome through a mechanism
that comes as close to applying the PDP
rules as possible.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CE966FE8-5868-492C-91B0-B1A6B36CE4BA@delong.com" class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><p class="">4 - In order to
either choose another
Co-Chair or to extend the
current one term there
must be a vote with raise
of hands. There is no
other way out of the PDP
this can be done.<br class="">
</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
This statement ignores CPM section
3.6:</div>
<blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0
40px; border: none; padding: 0px;" class="">
<div class="">
<h3 style="box-sizing:
border-box; font-family:
"Open Sans",
sans-serif; font-weight:
normal; line-height: 1.1;
color: rgb(117, 117, 117);
margin-top: 0px;
margin-bottom: 10px;
font-size: 24px; caret-color:
rgb(117, 117, 117);" class="">3.6 Varying
the Process</h3>
</div>
<div class=""><p style="box-sizing:
border-box; margin: 0px 0px
5px; caret-color: rgb(117,
117, 117); color: rgb(117,
117, 117); font-family:
Roboto, sans-serif; font-size:
14px;" class="">The process
outlined in this document may
vary in the case of an
emergency. Variance is for use
when a one-time waiving of
some provision of this
document is required.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="">
<ol style="box-sizing: border-box;
margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom:
10px; caret-color: rgb(117, 117,
117); color: rgb(117, 117, 117);
font-family: Roboto, sans-serif;
font-size: 14px;" class="">
<ol class="">
<li style="box-sizing:
border-box;" class="">The
decision to vary the process
is taken by a Working Group
Chair.</li>
<li style="box-sizing:
border-box;" class="">There
must be an explanation about
why the variance is needed.</li>
<li style="box-sizing:
border-box;" class="">The
review period, including the
Last Call, shall not be less
than four weeks.</li>
<li style="box-sizing:
border-box;" class="">If
there is consensus, the
policy is approved and it
must be presented at the
next Public Policy Meeting.</li>
</ol>
</ol>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
Clearly this is the kind of
exceptional circumstance in which
some variance could be justified.</div>
</blockquote>
Sorry I don't see 3.6 applying to this
situation on *any* of points
mentioned. This section is about how
the policies discussion, review, last
call, etc work 1) As I understand
this decision is not up to the Chairs
to take 2)Yes, we are working on the
explanation, but who will give it ?
Normally is whoever take the decision.
3) Nothing to do with elections 4)
Nothing to do with the current
scenario. There is no proper policy
under discussion to be approved, only
a discussion of what to do about the
next elections.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
It applies to all of the CPM ("The process
outlined in this document may vary…”).</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>1.
If not the co-chairs, then who?</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>2.
I think the explanation is well understood…
“Because in person meeting during the COVID
crisis is impossible.”</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>3.
I’m not so sure about this. Whatever
election process we decide on should be put
to a final community comment</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>period
of some form. I see no reason that should be
less than 4 weeks.</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>4.
So you’re saying that the determination of
how to (or whether to) conduct co-chair
elections should be made</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>by
some other method than community consensus
and should not be considered policy at least
for this meeting?</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>How
does that work?</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CE966FE8-5868-492C-91B0-B1A6B36CE4BA@delong.com" class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I still say that a
(virtual) raising of hands using
the mechanisms available in nearly
every conferencing system capable
of supporting</div>
<div class="">this meeting has the
following advantages:</div>
<div class="">q<br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>1.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Only
meeting attendees may vote.</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>2.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Botting
your meeting attendance would be
reasonably difficult, so it would
be difficult for a person to stuff
the ballot box.</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>3.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>It
does meet the literal requirements
of the existing PDP.</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>4.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>If
we place reasonable bounds on
meeting registration, we can avoid
the so-called “sleeper cell”
effect that some have</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>put
forth as a concern. (Personally, I
think this is less likely in a
virtual meeting anyway).</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>5.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>If
we place reasonable bounds on
meeting registration, we also
manage to prevent (2) from being a
concern.</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>6.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>By
“reasonable bounds”, I mean pick a
date certain in the past by which
one must have been subscribed to
RPD.</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Each
email subscribed to RPD is
entitled to one corresponding
meeting registration if they
choose to. No subscribed</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>email,
no registration for the meeting.</div>
</blockquote>
I quiet like this idea, and that is
exactly which is under discussion in
one of the policies that should
advance, but this is not backed in any
part of PDP as far as I know as the
moment. Who will determine what date
is this ?<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
This would most certainly be a variation of
the PDP to meet the emergency as it exists
which would be permitted under 3.6, so, yes,</div>
<div class="">my argument here depends on my
argument above which you have claimed you
are not buying. However, hopefully with my
expansions on</div>
<div class="">the topic above, I can perhaps
convince you to change your mind and
recognize that without something like that,
we literally box</div>
<div class="">ourselves into a situation with
no way forward until such time as we can
arrange an in-person meeting. Personally, I
think that’s</div>
<div class="">far from the best outcome.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CE966FE8-5868-492C-91B0-B1A6B36CE4BA@delong.com" class="">
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>7.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>My
suggestions for the date certain
would be the first day of the
originally scheduled in person AIS
2020 (May 31) or</div>
<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>the
originally scheduled first day of
the public policy meeting (June 8
IIRC).</div>
</blockquote><p class="">This would make sense if
there was basis for it, but
currently there is AFAIK.</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
The basis for it is 3.6. Read the CPM
carefully read 3.6. It’s not rocket science.
The CPM describes all of the policies, the
PDP, and the co-chair election process
within the one document. Section 3.6
provides for variance of the process[sic]
should be processes within</div>
<div class="">the document. That includes the
co-chair election process unless you can
show me why it does not.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Owen</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><p class="">Fernando<br class="">
</p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CE966FE8-5868-492C-91B0-B1A6B36CE4BA@delong.com" class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">If anyone has a reason
they don’t think this is viable,
please express it. So far, I’ve
seen lots of calls for other
solutions, but this</div>
<div class="">seems to be the
approach with the fewest drawbacks
and which can easily be
implemented in time.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Owen</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div><p class="">Regards<br class="">
Fernando</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On
20/07/2020 03:06, Daniel
Yakmut wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CAB3X6meTt=Pw8az5fmYeO6vaSiNOLL8pkG91YuBemSAjFWiwOw@mail.gmail.com" class="">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div dir="auto" class="">Dear
All,
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">We
arrive at the airport
and I will be turning
the simple matter
placed on the table
into a circus. The
simple matter was:</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">1.
We will have AIS 2020
online and in
September.</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">2.
A Co-chair's tenure
has already ended. So
an electronic election
is being proposed as
part of the AIS 2020
Agenda. The question
is, is this possible?</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">3.
It is a fact that the
Co-chair is currently
serving within an
extended period. </div>
<div dir="auto" class="">4.
We now agree that the
introduction of
e-voting is
inevitable, as
demonstrated by the
pandemic.</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">However
it is clear that</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">1.
We are going to have
an online meeting , as
nobody has disagreed
to that.</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">2.
There is a strong
advocacy, for a
process to include
e-voting in the
Region, but the timing
is short. Therefore we
need to commence the
plan of creating an
enabling atmosphere to
integrate e-voting.</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">3.
We need to ratify the
extended period for a
co-chair tentatively
for 12months. Which he
has spent a month or
so already.</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">4.
Ensure we have an
acceptable e-voting
system ready for the
next date of election.</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">5.
Let agreed clearly on
this simple issue and
prepare for the coming
meeting.</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Simply</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Daniel</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br class="">
<div class="gmail_quote">On
Jul 19, 2020 11:20 PM,
"Fernando Frediani"
<<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution" class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px
#ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto" class="">
<div class="">I
have read this
message and
several
questions come
to mind as for
example:</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">- What
basis was used
to say "it was
overwhelmingly"
rejected ?</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">- Who
actuallty
represents the
"current"
community to
state it was
"totally
rejected" ?</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">- Whats
basis was used
to say that it
would not work
in the region if
that works in
several other
places and RIRs
including, with
auditable
systems ?</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">- Whats
basis is used to
say rhe
community that
voted for the
current Co-Chair
in Kampla has
the same
confidence in
him and that he
would win ? It
seems more a
personal wish
than anything
based on fact or
logic.</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">- Even
in order to
extend the
current Co-Chair
term the PDP
MUST be followed
and there are no
other ways
written there
other than
another vote.
Otherwise how
can this be done
?</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Fernando</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
<br class="">
<div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, 19 Jul 2020, 18:08 Emem William, <<a href="mailto:dwizard65@gmail.com" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">dwizard65@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto" class="">
<div dir="auto" class="">Dear
All, </div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">I
can recollect
that a similar
proposal was
proposed as a
policy and it
was
overwhelmingly
rejected in
Angola. The
current
community
totally
rejected the
policy no one
except the
authors
supported the
idea because
we know it
can't work in
this region.
Using online
voting now
would be like
passing the
policy using
the backdoor.
Am sure Jordie
would like
this idea and
hence his
enthusiasm.
However my
candid opinion
is that we
can't do this.
The most
appropriate
way forward is
to allow the
Co chair who
has been doing
a fantastic
job to
continue for
another 12
months or till
the next face
to face
meeting. The
community that
voted him in
Kampala still
have
confidence in
him. In any
case even with
an online
election he
would still
likely win but
I don't want
polices to be
passed through
the back door.
Therefore I
think the most
appropriate
way for this
has been
suggested as
an extension
for the
co-chair who's
seat would
have been
contested.</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="auto" class="">Cheers.</div>
<div dir="auto" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div data-smartmail="gmail_signature" class="">Emem
E. William<br class="">
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
______________________________<wbr class="">_________________<br class="">
RPD mailing
list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br class="">
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">https://lists.afrinic.net/<wbr class="">mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br class="">
______________________________<wbr class="">_________________<br class="">
RPD mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br class="">
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">https://lists.afrinic.net/<wbr class="">mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
RPD mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
RPD mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
RPD mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
RPD mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">RPD mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" class="">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br class="">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>