<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Interpret decisions in good faith does not mean we have to agree
with them.</p>
<p>There has been a succession of mistakes and violations of the
PDP, not just one of another, but a list of them as put by
Gregoire and this must be resolved as soon as possible otherwise
gives people the sensation the discussion that happened for months
there was just ignored and the worst, the personal view of
Co-Chair end up dictating how as proposal text should be which is
unprecedented.<br>
How can a single quick discussion during PPM about the Legacy
resources be taken in consideration if it was NEVER questioned
during months of discussion in the list for example ? Actually how
can it be final in the Co-Chairs view without giving others who
did not participated on the PPM de opportunity to discuss it an
refute how bad this is for ? Are you have seen there is a fair
amount of people who don't agree with it and are having no chance
to put up their arguments as the decision seems to have already
been taken.<br>
</p>
<p>Co-Chairs have no right granted by the CPM to allow them to add
new issues that did not exist previously, and worse, as a
condition for authors for a proposal to reach consensus.<br>
Their function is to organize the discussion and declare if
consensus has been reached, not to put conditions how the text in
the proposal must be written or even to decide the RIR needs a
Transfer Policy or not.<br>
</p>
<p>Fernando<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 22/09/2020 12:58, Ekaterina Kalugina
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAHS7WUBSqJzbEX13YHvVK4Apdr5yEWYMYKu+MaEkv47oHiBFYQ@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:12pt;font-family:Cambria,serif">Dear
all,</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:12pt;font-family:Cambria,serif">Reading
this thread has been quite concerning. Let us
please stop demonizing the co-chairs who are struggling to
give order to a very
complex and contentious discussion. We must interpret their
decisions in good
faith instead of cherry-picking words and blowing issues out
of proportion. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:12pt;font-family:Cambria,serif">@Fernando:
the summary provided by co-chairs is comprehensive
and therefore includes all the concerns raised in regard to
the policies be it
during the summit or on the list. The issue of legacy
resources in the Resource
Transfer Policy is one of them, so it makes sense this was
included in the
review. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:12pt;font-family:Cambria,serif">As
for your statement and I quote:<br>
<span
style="color:rgb(80,0,80);background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">> </span>“<span
style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">So
you are
taking in consideration something that one mentioned in a
single day
opportunity over what has been discussed for months in the
list for for a much
larger number of people who contributed to it ?” </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:12pt;font-family:Cambria,serif">As
far as I understand the PDP (and please do correct me if
I am wrong), it does not matter how many people express an
opinion over a
proposal. The only things that matter are the constructive
arguments that were brought
up by the community. In addition, there is no requirement in
the CPM that
states that every single argument MUST be discussed on the
RPD list. This is the exact reason we
have PPM: some concerns may arise that were not present in the
mailing list discussion.
<br>
Thus, in my view, the inclusion of the legacy issue is
legitimate. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:12pt;font-family:Cambria,serif">Now,
that we are entering the last call period, we will have
a chance to have a constructive discussion over the issue as
per the CPM.<br>
<br>
<br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:12pt;font-family:Cambria,serif">@Gregiore:
let us please not jump to any conclusions and
make any groundless statements. Firstly, you wrote, and I
quote:<br>
<span
style="color:rgb(80,0,80);background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">>”</span><span
style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">Cochairs
appear to be deciding and injecting new issues not
previously mentioned in
working group”<br>
<br>
Again, each issue included by the chairs has been raised on
the RPD or the PPM,
so this statement is invalid.</span><br>
<br>
Secondly, you wrote:<br>
>
“<span
style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">Not
following due process of hearing authors and the hurry to
decide for working
group is unacceptable.:<br>
<br>
As far as I remember, the authors were given a chance to
reply to raised
concerns during the PPM. If that was not enough, they are
free to do so in the
last call. <br>
<br>
Thirdly, you said:<br>
>
“The cochairs report must rather provide an open issues list
of outstanding
issues for working group to deliberate on</span>”<br>
<br>
I absolutely agree with you here and this is exactly what the
summary provided
by the co-chairs contains. <br>
<br>
As for your statement: <br>
>
“There had been
no attempt by cochairs to gauge consensus throughout the
meeting” <br>
<br>
I am not sure if you noticed but we barely had time to give
the floor to
everyone. So it is unfair to blame chairs for something that
had physically no
time to do.<br>
<br>
Thus, in my view, NO VIOLATIONS of the PDP took place by the
chairs. All issues
that need to be addressed can be addressed now during the
last call period. <br>
<br>
<br>
Finally, @Noah:<br>
<br>
There was NO ABUSE of the PDP. As Gaby mentioned there is no
end date for the
last call in the CPM. <br>
<br>
So please let us stop these senseless attacks on the co-chairs
who are already
doing their best in dealing with these controversial issues. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:12pt;font-family:Cambria,serif"><span
style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">I
call for a constructive and respectful discussion during
the last call period as per the CPM. Let us work together to
ensure the best
possible future for the region.<br>
<br>
<br>
Best wishes to you all,<br>
<br>
Ekaterina Kay Kalugina <br>
</span></p>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:10
PM Noah <<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz"
moz-do-not-send="true">noah@neo.co.tz</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">Attention WG,<br>
<br>
I have also noted more violations of the PDP by Co-Chairs
from the last meeting. <br>
<br>
Section 3.4.3 of pdp says: “<b>The Last Call period shall
be at least two weeks</b>."<br>
<br>
The Co-Chairs did not follow this and did not specify the
duration of the last call for the proposals going to the
last call.<br>
<br>
Furthermore, which documents are to be discussed at this
unspecified last call? <br>
<br>
Why this rush? This abuse of the PDP must stop.<br>
<br clear="all">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div><b>./noah</b></div>
<div>neo - network engineering and
operations<b><br>
</b></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at
7:39 PM Gregoire EHOUMI via RPD <<a
href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">Dear Co-chairs and WG </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
During the AFRINIC-32 PPM which was held last week,
the proceedings and decisions made by cochairs,
raised many concerns. Below are some of them.<br>
The video of the meeting is publicly available.<br>
<br>
<br>
<b>Concern-1 objections management<br>
————</b><br>
cochairs chose some objections raised and even
not-raised, did not say why comments and
explanations provided by authors and the
participants on the raised and discussed issues were
unsatisfactory. <br>
<br>
Few examples<br>
<br>
⁃ Abuse contact proposal<br>
<br>
The valid and unresolved objections according to
co-chairs decisions were:<br>
• Definition of abuse<br>
• GDPR compliance <br>
• Impact of legacy resources<br>
<br>
<br>
⁃ RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned AFRINIC
Address Spaces <br>
<br>
The valid and unresolved objections according to
cochairs were:<br>
• AS0 ROA validity<br>
• Certain fear in the community that this proposal
may help staff reclaim resources if members failed
to pay membership fees.<br>
• Lack of a certain mitigation provision APNIC has
in their policy<br>
<br>
-WG guidelines and procedures<br>
<br>
The valid and unresolved objections according to
cochairs were:<br>
<br>
• the proposed appointment of cochairs by consensus
will create more problems for this community. <br>
• Cochairs should not have hands in consensus <br>
• also Board interference.<br>
<br>
⁃ Inter-RIR transfer proposals <br>
<br>
On the 3 proposals being discussed <br>
<br>
Cochairs decided that :<br>
• one is far from reaching consensus as incompatible
with ARIN as per staff.<br>
• The other 2 are closer</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
<b><br>
Concern-2 fairness in the proceeding <br>
——————————————————</b><br>
• When rendering their decisions and contrary to
what was announced, Cochairs did not question all
authors of transfer policy proposals showing bias<br>
<br>
• Staff’s demand to the WG to allow them to request
official compatibility analysis on each of the
proposals from other RIRs was denied <br>
<br>
• Authors were not even given chance to respond to
the point with ARIN <br>
<br>
<br>
<b>Concern-3 unilateral decisions by cochairs<br>
————————————————————</b><br>
• cochairs decided that Afrinic service region need
an inter-RIR transfer policy as matter as urgency
and can’t wait anymore <br>
<br>
• Cochairs decided that among the 3 proposals, the
one which aims to establish an efficient and
business-friendly mechanism to allow a number of
resources to be transferred from/to other regions,
should be pushed forward <br>
<br>
• Cochairs refused to consider the issues and the
implementation challenges raised by the staff
impact assessment on proposal<br>
<br>
• Cochairs decided on which amendments should be
made to the selected proposal for it to move
forward.<br>
<br>
1- Add 12 months delay for a source to be eligible
to receive allocation from AFRINIC<br>
<br>
2- Remove clause for legacy status after transfer <br>
<br>
3-Fix clarity on notifications to the other RIRs
after the transfer<br>
<br>
It is obvious that 1) contradicts both problem
statement and solution of the proposal preferred by
cochairs.<br>
<br>
Cochairs appear to be deciding and injecting new
issues not previously mentioned in working group.
Not following due process of hearing authors and the
hurry to decide for working group is unacceptable.
The cochairs report must rather provide an open
issues list of outstanding issues for working group
to deliberate on. There had been no attempt by
cochairs to gauge consensus throughout the meeting. <br>
<br>
In the view of all these violations of the PDP, I
urge you to reconsider all decisions made during the
last PPM and give chance to the WG to appropriately
address the open issues and come to the best
conclusions for the region.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Gregoire Ehoumi ( on behalf of the authors of WG
guidelines and procedures and AFRINIC Number
Ressources transfer proposals)</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto"
style="font-size:100%;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<div>-------- Original message --------</div>
<div>From: ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE <<a
href="mailto:oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng</a>>
</div>
<div>Date: 2020-09-20 8:06 p.m. (GMT-05:00) </div>
<div>To: rpd List <<a
href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>> </div>
<div>Subject: [rpd] Decisions and summary on policy
proposals discussed during the online Policy
meeting (AFRINIC 32) </div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br clear="all">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Dear PDWG Members,</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH"> Please find below a summary for
each of the
proposal
discussed during
the just
concluded
online policy
meeting of
AFRINIC 32 </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">1.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Simple
PDP Update </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">This policy defines consensus. It
also
proposes that
a policy
discussed at
the PPM does
not need to
come back for
another PPM
for the
Co-chairs to
arrive at a
decision. This
can help in
streamlining
the work
during the PPM
and encourages
people to use
the mailing
list. </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">There were lots of irrelevant
objections on
the mailing
list such as
someone
registering
many emails.
We believe
that this
does not
matter because
rough
consensus is
not about
numbers but
quality
objections.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">However,
there is
strong
opposition to
this policy
based on the
following: </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Oppose
the policy
because of
the way the
consensus is
reached. This
proposal
proposes that
the consensus
be
reached
through a
balance of the
mailing
list/forum and
not at the
PPM. This
endangers fair
consensus and
hijacks the
policymaking
process. Based
on
experience, it
is during the
PPM that most
community
members focus
on policies.
</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Issues
around how the
chairs
should drop
proposals.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Trust
in the mailing
list: Some
strongly
believe that
anonymous
contribution
should be
allowed while
some
believes it
should not.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Issues
around having
more than
1 PPM per year
and Online PPM
because of
volunteer
burnout. We
are all
volunteers and
it’s a night
job for us.
More PPMs mean
more time to
volunteer
and more
chances for
burnouts </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">e.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Some
members of the
Community
thinks only
burning or
polarizing
issues should
be brought to
the PPM.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Chairs Decision: No Consensus</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">2.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">PDP
Working Group
</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">This
proposal aims
at
allowing most
of the
decisions
including
chair
elections to
be determined
via
consensus.
This can be
reasonable
when
the community
has the same
goal. However,
there were a
number of
objections to
it. These are:</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Entrusting
the WG to make
their
decisions by
consensus and
the
appointment of
their
co-chairs by
consensus do
not make sense
and is only
utopic.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">People
are not policy
proposals, and
thus choosing
by consensus
is splitting
hairs with the
election
process we
already have.
Save the
consensus for
the proposals,
and the
election
for people.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Consensus
may even take
months,
and this can’t
fly when we
want to put
people in the
vacant roles.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Co-chairs
should not
have a
hand in the
consensus, but
only sit back
and let the
community
decide for
themselves.
Additionally,
the consensus
process is not
feasible with
a
deadline.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">e.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Focus
on polishing
the current
electoral
process
instead of
complicating
other untested
forms of
“election”.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">f.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">The
current status
quo’s
election
should be the
only option in
choosing for
the roles, and
not through
less
transparent
means.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">g.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Board
would be
interfering
too
much on issues
that deal with
PDP</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Chairs Decision: No Consensus</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">3.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Chairs
Election
Process </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">This proposal aims at introducing
an online
voting system
for the
Co-Chairs
election. The
following are
the opposition
to
this proposal.
</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">This
policy reduces
participation.
Equal
representation
is violated
because the
board has
unprecedented
power. </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">There
is also not
enough
information on
the logistics
of the vote
(e-voting).</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">There
is a
contradiction
<strike>on </strike>when
the term ends
during the
meeting. “The
term ends
during the
first PPM
corresponding
to the end of
the term for
which they
were
appointed” is
not
clear enough,
and “A term
may begin or
end no sooner
than the first
day of the
PPM and no
later than the
last day of
the PPM as
determined by
mutual
agreement
of the current
Chair and the
new Chair”
contradicts
each other.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Gender
restriction on
3.3.1.3 ,
some community
members argue
it is
impractical
and maybe even
unfair if we
force both
chairs to have
different
genders.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">e.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Issues
around which
voter's
register
should be
adopted </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Chairs Decision: No Consensus</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">4.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Board
Prerogatives </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">This proposal aims at clarifying
how the
board and the
PDWG works.
However, there
were a few
oppositions to
this proposal
except for a
specific
section. </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">It
seems like a
piecemeal
approach
to dealing
with issues. </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Opposition
to the section
below</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><i><span lang="EN-PH">“As an exception of the
preceding
paragraph, in
the absence of
elections
processes for
aspects
related to the
PDP
(co-chairs,
appeal
committee),
those aspects
will be still
handled by the
board
in
consultation
with the
community.
However, this
is also a
temporary
measure
and also
specific draft
policy
proposals
should be
introduced for
that</span></i><span
lang="EN-PH">”.
The authors
agreed to
remove the
above section
hence</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Chairs Decision: Consensus provided
the
above section
is removed </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">5.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Policy
Compliance
Dashboard</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">The policy proposal seeks to
provide a
framework or a
policy
compliance
dashboard be
developed by
AFRINIC and
incorporated
in myAFRINIC
(and future
member’s
communication
platforms).
It will allow
a periodic
review of the
policy
compliance
status of each
member. It
will also
enable members
to receive
automated
notifications
for any issue.
Staff will
receive
repeated
warnings of
lack of
compliance or
severe
violations
enshrined in
the CPM.
However, there
are several
oppositions to
this proposal,
such as:</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">This
policy seems
to be
redundant
of the status
quo as
violations are
already
checked and
processed by
the human
staff.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">There
is already an
existing
system of
guidelines on
keeping track
of the
violations of
members.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">The
policy is not
binding and
does not
enforce
members
actually to
follow the
rules and not
violate
policies.
</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Ignorance
could be a
convenient
excuse for
violations
because one
could claim
that they
never got
notified
about their
violations.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">e.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">There
is no
comprehensive
system on how
the board
should take
proper actions
once members
violate
policies,
nor does it
give
guidelines
based on the
severity of
the
violations.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">f.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">This
policy takes
away
resources that
could be used
for more
beneficial
pursuits to
AFRINIC for
something
existing in
the system.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">g.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">It
an
administrative
process, and
this should be
left to staff</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Chairs Decision: NO rough
Consensus</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">6.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Abuse
Contact Update
</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">The proposal makes it mandatory for
AFRINIC
to include in
each resource
registration,
a contact
where network
abuse from
users of those
resources will
be reported.
The proposal
whois DB
attribute
(abuse-c) to
be used to
publish abuse
public contact
information.
There’s also a
process to
ensure that
the recipient
must receive
abuse report
and that
contacts are
validated by
AFRINIC
regularly.
However, there
some
opposition to
the proposal
there are:</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Staff
analysis on
how it affects
legacy holder
not
conclusive
(not sure
why this
should affect
legacy
holders) </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">The
proposal
doesn’t state
what
will be the
consequences
of one member
fails to
comply. Why
are we
creating the
abuse contact
when there is
no consequence
for not
providing the
abuse contact
</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Abuse
contact email
and issues
with GDPR
concerning the
whois database</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">No
proper
definition of
the
term Abuse</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">e.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">To
force members
to reply to
their
abuse email is
not in the
scope of
AFRINIC.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Chairs Decision: No rough consensus
</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">7.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">RPKI
ROAs for
Unallocated
and
Unassigned
AFRINIC
Address Space</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">The proposal instructs AFRINIC to
create
ROAs for all
unallocated
and unassigned
address space
under its
control. This
will enable
networks
performing
RPKI-based BGP
Origin
Validation to
easily
reject all the
bogon
announcements
covering
resources
managed by
AFRINIC.
However, there
are many
oppositions
such as: </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Allowing
resource
holders to
create AS0/
ROA will lead
to an increase
of even more
invalid
prefixes in
the
routing table.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Revocation
time of AS0
state,
and the time
for new
allocation
doesn’t match.
</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Other
RIRs don’t
have a similar
the policy
therefore, it
can not be
effective</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">This
will become a
uniform
policy if it
is not
globally
implemented,
which causes
additional
stress. </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">e.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Validity
period: if
members decide
to implement
it, is it not
better to
recover the
space if it is
kept unused
for too long?</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">f.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">How
do we revoke
the ROA? How
long
does it take
to revoke it
(chain/
refreshing )?</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">g.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">What
happens if
AFRINIC
accidentally
issues a ROA
for an address
in error?</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">h.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">It
also might
affect the
neighbours and
involves
monitoring of
unallocated
spaces.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">i.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Possibility
of it being
used
against a
member who is
yet to pay
dues.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Suggestions were made to improve
the policy
such as </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
135pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">a)<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">The
automatic
creation of
AS0
ROAs should be
limited to
space that has
never been
allocated by
an RIR or part
of a legacy
allocation.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
135pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">b)<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">AFRINIC
should require
the
explicit
consent of the
previous
holder to
issue AS0 ROAs
in respect of
re-claimed,
returned, etc,
space.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
135pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">c)<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Any
ROAs issued
under this
policy should
be issued and
published in a
way that makes
it
operationally
easy
for a relying
party to
ignore them
(probably by
issuing under
a separate
TA).</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
135pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">d)<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">The
proposal
should include
the
clause “as
used in APNIC
as to dues not
paid on time.”</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Chairs Decision: No consensus</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">8.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">IPv4
Inter-RIR
Resource
Transfers
(Comprehensive
Scope)</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">The proposal puts in place a
mechanism to
transfer IPv4
and (some ASN)
resources
between
AFRINIC and
other RIRs and
between
AFRINIC
members/entities.
Some
conditions are
attached to
the source and
recipient
based on need
and disclosure
made. The
inter-RIR
transfers will
be suspended
if
the number of
outgoing IPv4
addresses
exceeds the
incoming ones
for six
consecutive
months.
However, there
are
oppositions to
it</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">ASN
Transfer is
not necessary</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Issue
of board
inferring: no
board in all
of the five
RIRs have ever
been involved
in deciding a
transfer or
allocating IP
address. It is
not the
board's
responsibility.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Suspending
clause with no
reinstalling
clause. This
mainly makes
the
policy
potentially
invalid. </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Chairs Decision: No consensus.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">9.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">AFRINIC
Number
Resource
Transfer</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Not
realistic for
one-way inter
RIR resource
transfer as it
has to be
reciprocal.
One way would
never happen
as
only global
resources can
come in and go
out </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">It
would be
difficult for
the recipient
to follow the
rules of
AFRINIC if
they are not
in the African
region.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">No
need for ASN
transfer. If
one is moving
regions and
doesn't have
an ASN in the
new region, it
can request
and receive
from the local
RIRs</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Additional
attributes
create
none-operational complexity in the whois database.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Chairs Decision: No consensus.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">10.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Resource
Transfer
Policy</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">This proposal aims to introduce
Inter RIR
transfer.
However, it
has the
following
opposition </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Issues
with Legacy
holder
transfer is
potentially
considered
none-reciprocal
by ARIN</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
1.25in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">Potential
abuse of
AFRINIC free
pool without
the time limit
of receiving
an allocation
from AFRINIC.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Chairs Decision: The proposal is
the least
contested of
all the 3
competing
proposals.
However
because of the
community’s
desire and
clear
expression for
the need
for an Inter
RIR transfer,
we, the
Co-chairs,
believe that
in the
interest of
the community
we should
focus on a
proposal
rather than
several
similar ones.
This desire
was clearly
expressed at
the AFRINIC 31
meeting in
Angola.
Therefore, We
suggest that
the authors of
this proposal
make the
following
amendments: </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
style="font-family:Symbol" lang="EN-PH">·<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">5.7.3.2
Source
entities are
not eligible
to receive
further IPv4
allocations or
assignments
from AFRINIC
for 12 months
period after
the transfer.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span
style="font-family:Symbol" lang="EN-PH">·<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span><span
lang="EN-PH">5.7.4.3.
Transferred
legacy
resources will
still be
regarded as
legacy
resources.</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Chairs Decision: Provided that the
above are
amended, the
decisions is
Rough
Consensus is
achieved
</span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Based on the above, The updated
version of the
follow
proposal which
achieved rough
consensus
would be
posted on the
PDWG
website </span></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 0.0001pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><b><span
lang="EN-PH">1.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-weight:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span></b><b><span
lang="EN-PH">Board
Prerogatives </span></b></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in 8pt
0.5in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><b><span
lang="EN-PH">2.<span
style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-weight:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times
New
Roman"">
</span></span></b><b><span
lang="EN-PH">Resource
Transfer
Policy</span></b></p>
<p
style="margin:0in
0in
8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"
class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-PH">Therefore, these two policies are
now on
last call. </span></p>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div
style="font-size:small"><br>
Co-Chair </div>
<div
style="font-size:small">PDWG</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div><a style="font-size:1.3em"
href="http://www.unilorin.edu.ng" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">Website</a><span
style="font-size:1.3em">,</span><span
style="font-size:1.3em"> </span><span
style="font-size:1.3em"><a
href="http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/bulletin"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Weekly
Bulletin</a> <a
href="http://uilugportal.unilorin.edu.ng/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">UGPortal</a>
<a href="https://uilpgportal.unilorin.edu.ng/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">PGPortal</a></span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>