<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>In no part of the CPM says that Chairs' role is to suggest
changes in the proposals, but to determine rough consensus has
been achieved or not.</p>
<p>It was mentioned all they did was in good faith and I am not
seeming people disputing that. However even considering they did
in good faith if they committed a mistake they must repair that by
taking some of the proposals out of last call and brig back to
discussion.<br>
I am hoping they are carefully evaluating all the recent comments
and can take the right decision in the benefit of the region by
the due date.<br>
</p>
<p>As I have been saying, more important than get a supposedly
needed policy as soon as possible is to get it right.</p>
<p>Regards<br>
Fernando<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 24/09/2020 20:38, lucilla fornaro
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKJg62J_xdi9Y99qD0rr1MYMNJDAE15cbZR5otRX6CFW+PcktQ@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">Hello Jordi and everyone,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>I have to disagree with pretty much every point, in
particular, for what concerns points 1 and 2.</div>
<div>First of all, the use of words should be highly
pondered. Coercion is a serious business and it is a
tactic that violates the principles of AFRINIC. You seem
to say that Co-chairs used coercion as a threat of
penalty to induce authors to agree to avoid unpleasant
outcomes. This is completely wrong!</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Chairs job is to address major objections and suggest
changes which is part of their administrative work and
Co-chairs did a very good job in that sense.
Furthermore, it is not forbidden and they did it in good
faith. I see no force and no coercion in any of their
suggestions.</div>
</div>
<div><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px">regards,</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px">Lucilla </span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px"> </span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Il giorno gio 24 set 2020 alle
ore 01:06 JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <<a
href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>>
ha scritto:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word" lang="ES">
<div class="gmail-m_770924678866717427WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt"
lang="EN-US">HI AK, all,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt"
lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt"
lang="EN-US">I’ve confronted feelings myself. Somehow,
I will like to support how you tried to take decisions
(pending on a concrete analysis for each proposal,
that I’ve not got the time to do yet) and the way you
declared consensus, so we can make some progress,
especially for finally resolving the Inter-RIR issue
which I think it is extremely urgent for AFRINIC
assuming that it is implementable and functional,
otherwise, it is just a waste of time.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt"
lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt"
lang="EN-US">However, there are several points that
are clearly violations of the PDP. And I’m saying this
even it is clearly against one of my own proposal
which reached consensus (based on your decision), but
as community, we must be clear and honest regardless
of being against us as authors.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt"
lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt"
lang="EN-US">Let me try to explain every point,
following the PDP in our CPM:</span></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0cm" type="1" start="1">
<li class="gmail-m_770924678866717427MsoListParagraph"
style="margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"
lang="EN-US">Section 3.3. As it has been said
earlier the chairs are there to perform
administrative functions (manage the meeting, the
list, determine consensus). There is no
authorization in the PDP to allow you to “force
authors” to “change this or that” if you want your
proposal to reach consensus.</span></li>
<li class="gmail-m_770924678866717427MsoListParagraph"
style="margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"
lang="EN-US">I fully understand the goal and I
applaud it, but then it must be given *<b>the same
opportunity</b>* to all the proposals, otherwise
you’re acting in a discriminatory way towards
different proposals. At the end even in the extreme
case, if all the proposal reach consensus, it is not
really relevant because if authors agree or not to
do changes that still don’t like to the community,
they will fail in the last call. So, it is fine that
you suggest to authors what do you believe are
“nits” to avoid failure in the last call, but not
actually coercing them to apply specific changes. In
the meeting, during the open mic, you were
suggesting that the “simple PDP update” can also
reach consensus if I agree to some changes. I was
not capturing your point until I saw the video a day
after. Even in the video you can see that some
audio/video is missing, and the actual audio that I
was getting during the video was not good at that
time. It is not a complain about that specific
proposal, just an example. So, do you think that’s
fair? If you really want to give the authors a
chance during the last call, the way to do it is *<b>before</b>*
the open mic, talking to them. In fact, as we
discussed a few days ago, you didn’t have to declare
consensus in the open mic, as Alain suggested, it
can be done a couple of days after, so you’ve time
to coordinate with the authors, they can already
send a revised version, etc.</span></li>
<li class="gmail-m_770924678866717427MsoListParagraph"
style="margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"
lang="EN-US">This PDP (3.4.3) doesn’t allow changes
for the last call or right before it. In other PDP
of other RIRs there is an explicit “editorial
changes are allowed”. We don’t have that. Even if we
have that, what is an editorial change? We have
actually a problem with that in the last LACNIC
meeting. For me an editorial change is only
correcting grammar or mistakes, but not amending a
full section. The practice that we followed in
AFRINIC has been to accept this type of changes only
(correct mistakes, remove superfluous text, clarify
text) but not *<b>change conditions in the policies</b>*.
Again, I applaud the goal, but is not right, and it
is a clear matter for a valid appeal.</span></li>
</ol>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">Note
something else, that I’ve said many times, in all
the RIRs. I see the chairs as super-heroes. I’m
happy to prepare and defend other 100 proposals, but
not to be a chair, so my sincere admiration towards
you. However, that doesn’t imply that, as humans,
you can make mistakes and that’s also why the PDP
provides (3.5.1) a conflict resolution that includes
raising the issues with you. Otherwise, anyone in
the community is able to appeal, not just for any
specific proposal, but for the general decisions
taken in the meeting. So my suggestion to avoid that
is that you should reconsider your decisions and
clarify what is a valid-objection and what is not
for each proposal.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">In
the worst case, if the community is not satisfied we
can also follow the recall process (3.5.3), but
hopefully we don’t need to go for that and repeat
the full meeting, etc. It will also take time for
the board to call for the recall committee, etc.
Let’s avoid it and that means that you react to the
different open questions, in general and for each
proposal.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">That
said, providing solutions, for the most urgent
policy that this region needs, the Inter-RIR, we can
resolve the issue, if it fails the last call or
there is an valid appeal, using the Varying the
process (3.6) PDP section. This still will mean we
lost 2-3 months. The other alternative is what I
proposed the other day. Asking the board to call for
a focussed meeting in December, may be just for
Inter-RIR, or may be 3-4 sessions of 1-2 hours for
sets of proposals, grouped in similar aspects.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">I’m
also still wainting your detailed responses, and
also from the staff (for some points) to my emails
on the morning of 21/9/2020 regarding two of my
proposals. Please follow up ASAP.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">I
will be sending, still very busy, sorry about that,
specific emails for each of the other policy
proposals.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">Regards,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">Jordi</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">@jordipalet</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt"
lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt"
lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">El
22/9/20 23:46, "ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE" <<a
href="mailto:oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng</a>>
escribió:</p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">Dear Gregoire,</p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">Thank
you. Your concerns are noted. We would endure that
we come up with the best solution for the region
based on openness, transparency and fairness. We
have not broken any section of the CPM rather we
upheld the CPM. 3.2.3 of the CPM says</p>
</div>
<h3
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:7.5pt;margin-left:35.4pt;box-sizing:border-box"><span
style="font-size:18pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(117,117,117);font-weight:normal">3.2.3 Fairness</span></h3>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(117,117,117)">The
policies are to ensure fair distribution of
resources and facilitating the operation of the
Internet. </span><span
style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:red">Actions
are taken within a reasonable period of time.</span><span
style="color:red"> </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">3.4.2
.... <span
style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(117,117,117)">The
Chair(s) determine(s) whether rough consensus has
been achieved during the Public Policy Meeting.</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(117,117,117)">Co-
Chair PDWG</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">On
Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 5:30 PM Gregoire EHOUMI <<a
href="mailto:gregoire.ehoumi@yahoo.fr"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">gregoire.ehoumi@yahoo.fr</a>>
wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-style:none none none
solid;border-left-width:1pt;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding:0cm
0cm 0cm 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">Dear
Co-chairs and WG </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><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>
<span style="font-family:"Segoe UI
Symbol",sans-serif">⁃</span> 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>
<span style="font-family:"Segoe UI
Symbol",sans-serif">⁃</span> 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>
<span style="font-family:"Segoe UI
Symbol",sans-serif">⁃</span> 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</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><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)</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
style="color:black">-------- Original
message --------</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
style="color:black">From: ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE
<<a
href="mailto:oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng</a>>
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
style="color:black">Date: 2020-09-20 8:06
p.m. (GMT-05:00) </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
style="color:black">To: rpd List <<a
href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>>
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
style="color:black">Subject: [rpd] Decisions
and summary on policy proposals discussed
during the online Policy meeting (AFRINIC
32) </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
style="color:black"> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><br
clear="all">
</p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">Dear
PDWG Members,</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">1.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Simple
PDP Update </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><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
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">However,
there is
strong
opposition to
this policy
based on the
following: </span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Issues
around how the
chairs should
drop
proposals.</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">e.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">Chairs
Decision: No
Consensus</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">2.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">PDP
Working Group
</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">e.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">f.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">g.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Board
would be
interfering
too much on
issues that
deal with PDP</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">Chairs
Decision:
No Consensus</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">3.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Chairs
Election
Process </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">This
policy reduces
participation.
Equal
representation
is violated
because the
board has
unprecedented
power. </span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">There
is also not
enough
information on
the logistics
of the vote
(e-voting).</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">There
is a
contradiction
<s>on </s>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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">e.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Issues
around which
voter's
register
should be
adopted </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">Chairs
Decision: No
Consensus</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">4.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Board
Prerogatives </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">It
seems like a
piecemeal
approach to
dealing with
issues. </span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Opposition
to the section
below</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><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
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">Chairs
Decision:
Consensus
provided the
above section
is removed </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">5.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Policy
Compliance
Dashboard</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">e.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">f.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">g.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">It
an
administrative
process, and
this should be
left to staff</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">Chairs
Decision: NO
rough
Consensus</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">6.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Abuse
Contact Update
</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Abuse
contact email
and issues
with GDPR
concerning the
whois database</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">No
proper
definition of
the term Abuse</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">e.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">To
force members
to reply to
their abuse
email is not
in the scope
of AFRINIC.</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">Chairs
Decision: No
rough
consensus </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">7.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">RPKI
ROAs for
Unallocated
and Unassigned
AFRINIC
Address Space</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Revocation
time of AS0
state, and the
time for new
allocation
doesn’t match.
</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">e.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">f.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">g.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">What
happens if
AFRINIC
accidentally
issues a ROA
for an address
in error?</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">h.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">It
also might
affect the
neighbours and
involves
monitoring of
unallocated
spaces.</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">i.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Possibility
of it being
used against a
member who is
yet to pay
dues.</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">Suggestions
were made to
improve the
policy such as
</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:170.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">a)</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:170.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">b)</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:170.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">c)</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:170.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">d)</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">Chairs
Decision: No
consensus</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">8.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">IPv4
Inter-RIR
Resource
Transfers
(Comprehensive
Scope)</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">ASN
Transfer is
not necessary</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Suspending
clause with no
reinstalling
clause. This
mainly makes
the policy
potentially
invalid. </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">Chairs
Decision: No
consensus.</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">9.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">AFRINIC
Number
Resource
Transfer</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">c.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">d.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Additional
attributes
create
none-operational
complexity in
the whois
database.</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">Chairs
Decision: No
consensus.</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">10.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Resource
Transfer
Policy</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">This
proposal aims
to introduce
Inter RIR
transfer.
However, it
has the
following
opposition </span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">a.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Issues
with Legacy
holder
transfer is
potentially
considered
none-reciprocal
by ARIN</span></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:125.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">b.</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">Potential
abuse of
AFRINIC free
pool without
the time limit
of receiving
an allocation
from AFRINIC.</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
style="font-family:Symbol" lang="EN-PH">·</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times
New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
style="font-family:Symbol" lang="EN-PH">·</span><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times
New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><span
lang="EN-PH">5.7.4.3.
Transferred
legacy
resources will
still be
regarded as
legacy
resources.</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">Chairs
Decision:
Provided that
the above are
amended, the
decisions is
Rough
Consensus is
achieved
</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH"> </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><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-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><b><span
lang="EN-PH">1.</span></b><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><b><span
lang="EN-PH">Board
Prerogatives </span></b></p>
<p
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:71.4pt;line-height:106%"><b><span
lang="EN-PH">2.</span></b><span
style="font-size:7pt;line-height:106%;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"
lang="EN-PH">
</span><b><span
lang="EN-PH">Resource
Transfer
Policy</span></b></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:8pt;margin-left:35.4pt;line-height:106%"><span
lang="EN-PH">Therefore,
these two
policies are
now on last
call. </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:12pt"><br>
Co-Chair </span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:12pt">PDWG</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><a
href="http://www.unilorin.edu.ng"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:14.5pt">Website</span></a><span
style="font-size:14.5pt">, <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></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"> </p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><a
href="http://www.unilorin.edu.ng" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:14.5pt">Website</span></a><span
style="font-size:14.5pt">, <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></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"> </p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
</p>
</div>
<br>
**********************************************<br>
IPv4 is over<br>
Are you ready for the new Internet ?<br>
<a href="http://www.theipv6company.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.theipv6company.com</a><br>
The IPv6 Company<br>
<br>
This electronic message contains information which may be
privileged or confidential. The information is intended to
be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above
and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying,
distribution or use of the contents of this information,
even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you
are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure,
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, even if partially, including attached files, is
strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense,
so you must reply to the original sender to inform about
this communication and delete it.<br>
<br>
</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>