<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div>Dear Anthony,</div><div><br></div><div>I also support the idea of (if needed) working on a different proposal to discuss and solve problems related to the legacy status. </div><div>I see no benefit for Afrinic to force legacy space holders to lose their status and become a member, it is a simplistic and not efficient way to manage a more articulate problem. In my opinion, Afrinic should work on engaging with them, rather than fight them.</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Lucilla </div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Il giorno sab 26 set 2020 alle ore 07:18 Anthony Ubah <<a href="mailto:ubah.tonyiyke@gmail.com" target="_blank">ubah.tonyiyke@gmail.com</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 dir="auto"><div>Hello Fenando,<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Are we throwing out the bathing water together with the baby? Does Legacy status impact on today's immediate problem? </div><div dir="auto">Suggestion please.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Like I said, the Legacy status of resources if not concluded here can be discussed in a separate proposal. Opinions will always be divided on certain issues.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Kind regards, </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Anthony Ubah </div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Sep 25, 2020, 10:20 PM <<a href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a>> wrote:<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">Send RPD mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:rpd-owner@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd-owner@afrinic.net</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of RPD digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. Re: Decisions and summary on policy proposals discussed<br>
during the online Policy meetin (Fernando Frediani)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 18:19:55 -0300<br>
From: Fernando Frediani <<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [rpd] Decisions and summary on policy proposals discussed<br>
during the online Policy meetin<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:388bba0e-3230-f34a-5273-49595ef4a0fe@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">388bba0e-3230-f34a-5273-49595ef4a0fe@gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"<br>
<br>
On 25/09/2020 18:07, Anthony Ubah wrote:<br>
> <clip><br>
><br>
><br>
> With respect to my policy proposal on Number resource Transfer, a <br>
> questions was asked about legacy resources. This is relatively trivial <br>
> to the idea of the policy in general. This can be subject to a new <br>
> Legacy policy in its own right. However this proposal was done with <br>
> the grand intention of gaining reciprocity with the key donor of IPv4s <br>
> which is ARIN. The issues raised shouldn't halt this policy. Jordi <br>
> made some valid recommendations which can be considered.<br>
<br>
It is definitively not. Letting them remain considered legacy is a <br>
*major issue* that only benefit a few actors who gain financially with <br>
it, plus incentives the continuation of a historic internet issue that <br>
must end and bring all resources under common rules that any other <br>
organization is bounded to on the top of helping ending possible abuses <br>
from those who are still not subject to the rules of any RIR.<br>
<br>
On the top of that this has never been mentioned in *any* message for <br>
months of discussion and has never been raised as an issue. Suddenly <br>
someone goes to the PPM, mentions that, it becomes a mandatory change in <br>
order for the proposal to reach rough consensus and the rest of the <br>
people who discussed it in details have no chance oppose and properly <br>
put up their points ? It doesn't make sense !<br>
If the logic is that then people that have financial means to attend a <br>
future event may be in advantage of others that participate only in the <br>
RPD list if willing to change something substantial in the proposal at <br>
the very last minute.<br>
<br>
FYI the Inter-RIR transfer policy in LACNIC states any legacy resources <br>
transferred loses its status and it is still reciprocal to any other RIR <br>
that have an Inter-RIR policy.<br>
<br>
Fernando<br>
<br>
><br>
> Lastly a comments was made about our problem statement. I think it is <br>
> clearly stated. The use of the term "Business" has raised a few <br>
> eyebrows and instigated ominous thoughts. I urge everyone to read <br>
> again with an open mind. Internet is a global enterprise, and Number <br>
> resources, internet, IT infrastructure and business are an integral <br>
> part of our world today. It is impractical to separate the use of <br>
> number resources from business.<br>
><br>
><br>
> These are my 10Cents.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Kind regards,<br>
><br>
> Anthony Ubah<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020, 5:03 PM <<a href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a> <br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a>>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Send RPD mailing list submissions to<br>
> <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
><br>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
> <<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>><br>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
> <a href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a>><br>
><br>
> You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
> <a href="mailto:rpd-owner@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd-owner@afrinic.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:rpd-owner@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd-owner@afrinic.net</a>><br>
><br>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
> than "Re: Contents of RPD digest..."<br>
><br>
><br>
> Today's Topics:<br>
><br>
> ? ?1. Re: Decisions and summary on policy proposals discussed<br>
> ? ? ? during the online Policy meeting (AFRINIC 32) (Blaise Fyama)<br>
><br>
><br>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
><br>
> Message: 1<br>
> Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 18:02:20 +0200<br>
> From: Blaise Fyama <<a href="mailto:bfyama@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">bfyama@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:bfyama@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">bfyama@gmail.com</a>>><br>
> To: ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE <<a href="mailto:oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng</a>>><br>
> Cc: rpd List <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a>>><br>
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Decisions and summary on policy proposals discussed<br>
> ? ? ? ? during the online Policy meeting (AFRINIC 32)<br>
> Message-ID:<br>
> ? ? ? ?<br>
> <CAPehF5dv=<a href="mailto:5yc_bHR6OEJwtr7V28qNhTk-tK-sf1C_eAxWGLmVQ@mail.gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">5yc_bHR6OEJwtr7V28qNhTk-tK-sf1C_eAxWGLmVQ@mail.gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:5yc_bHR6OEJwtr7V28qNhTk-tK-sf1C_eAxWGLmVQ@mail.gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">5yc_bHR6OEJwtr7V28qNhTk-tK-sf1C_eAxWGLmVQ@mail.gmail.com</a>>><br>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
><br>
> Chers co-chairs,<br>
> Sans ?tre virulents ? votre ?gard j'ai juste deux remarques ?<br>
> faire d'abord:<br>
><br>
> 1. L'aspect multilinguiste devrait ?tre respect? dans la prise en<br>
> compte de<br>
> vos d?cisions, et je n'en ai pas le sentiment, ce qui implique que<br>
> pour<br>
> accompagner solidement vos conclusions et vos inf?rences, un tableau<br>
> transparent regroupant sommairement les r?actions de chaque membre<br>
> politique apr?s politique serait le bienvenu car il permettrait ?<br>
> tout le<br>
> monde d'avoir une vue claire et optimale de vos d?cisions.<br>
> ?tant un acad?mique de carri?re, je constate que sur 10 politiques<br>
> seulement 2 sont adopt?es ou en voie de l'?tre ce qui laisse<br>
> sous-entendre<br>
> que les 8 autres politiques, qui pourtant r?sultent de grands efforts,<br>
> donnent un sentiment d'?chec ? leurs auteurs. Pourriez-vous<br>
> ?couter un peu<br>
> plus leurs auteurs?<br>
> Je reconnais par exemple que Jordi a longuement interagis et<br>
> ?chang? avec<br>
> plusieurs d'entre nous sa proposition m?riterait d'?voluer.<br>
><br>
> 2. Lorsqu'une remarque techniquement et valablement soutenue vous est<br>
> adress?e pourriez-vous aussi donner des explications<br>
> proportionnellement longues? Vos r?ponses courtes et laconiques<br>
> laissent un<br>
> sentiment de manque de consid?ration de ce qui vous est adress?<br>
> par les<br>
> membres. Sinon vous risquez d'inspirer ? leur tour les membres du<br>
> PDWG que<br>
> nous sommes ? concevoir des politiques qui limitent votre propre r?le.<br>
><br>
> La note positive dans tout ?a est que les 2 politiques ? savoir<br>
> les "Les<br>
> pr?rogatives du conseil" et "Politique de transfert des<br>
> ressources" au vu<br>
> des longues discussions pendant des mois ont quand m?me fait du<br>
> chemin. Je<br>
> note seulement que nous devons rester alerte pour? "Les<br>
> pr?rogatives du<br>
> conseil"? afin de ne pas affaiblir non plus le conseil qui devrait<br>
> demeurer<br>
> un organe de prise des d?cisions, pour plus d'efficience et<br>
> d'efficacit?<br>
> dans le fonctionnement de la communaut?.<br>
> J'en f?licite les auteurs, surtout Taiwo avec qui j'ai eu<br>
> l'opportunit?<br>
> d'?changer lors de l'avant-dernier sommet en Angola.<br>
><br>
> Pour finir chers co-chairs efforcez-vous d'?tre multilingues pour nous<br>
> ?crire en Fran?ais comme nous aussi on vous ?crit parfois en Anglais.<br>
><br>
> Cordialement,<br>
> Blaise.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Blaise FYAMA<br>
> Msc, PhD.<br>
> Professeur Associ?<br>
> Secr?taire G?n?ral Acad?mique Honoraire/UL<br>
> Doyen de la Facult? des Sciences Informatiques/UPL<br>
> Doyen a.i de la Facult? Polytechnique/UPL<br>
> Chef de D?partement G?nie Electrique/ESI-UNILU<br>
> Chef de Service Informatique/Polytech-UNILU<br>
> Consultant Informatique BIT/PAEJK<br>
> Membre de International Research Conference IRC/WASET<br>
> Tel: +243995579515<br>
> Num?ro O.N.I.CIV: 00460<br>
><br>
> MSc, PhD.<br>
><br>
> Associate Professor<br>
><br>
> Honorary Academic Secretary General / UL<br>
><br>
> Dean of the Faculty of Computer Science / UPL<br>
><br>
> Dean a.i of the Polytechnic Faculty / UPL<br>
><br>
> Head of Department of Electrical Engineering / ESI-UNILU<br>
><br>
> IT Service Manager / Polytech-UNILU<br>
><br>
> IT Consultant BIT / PAEJK<br>
><br>
> Member of International Research Conference IRC/WASET<br>
><br>
> Phone: +243995579515<br>
><br>
> O.N.I.CIV number: 00460<br>
><br>
><br>
> Le lun. 21 sept. 2020 ? 02:06, ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE <<br>
> <a href="mailto:oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng</a>>> a<br>
> ?crit :<br>
><br>
> ><br>
> > Dear PDWG Members,<br>
> ><br>
> >? Please find below a summary for each of the proposal discussed<br>
> during the<br>
> > just concluded online policy meeting of AFRINIC 32<br>
> ><br>
> > 1.? ? ? ?Simple PDP Update<br>
> ><br>
> > This policy defines consensus. It also proposes that a policy<br>
> discussed at<br>
> > the PPM does not need to come back for another PPM for the<br>
> Co-chairs to<br>
> > arrive at a decision. This can help in streamlining the work<br>
> during the PPM<br>
> > and encourages people to use the mailing list.<br>
> ><br>
> > There were lots of irrelevant objections on the mailing list such as<br>
> > someone registering many emails. We believe that this does not<br>
> matter<br>
> > because rough consensus is not about numbers but quality objections.<br>
> ><br>
> > However, there is strong opposition to this policy based on the<br>
> following:<br>
> ><br>
> > a.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Oppose the policy because of the way the<br>
> consensus<br>
> > is reached. This proposal proposes that the consensus be reached<br>
> through a<br>
> > balance of the mailing list/forum and not at the PPM. This<br>
> endangers fair<br>
> > consensus and hijacks the policymaking process. Based on<br>
> experience, it is<br>
> > during the PPM that most community members focus on policies.<br>
> ><br>
> > b.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Issues around how the chairs should drop<br>
> proposals.<br>
> ><br>
> > c.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Trust in the mailing list: Some strongly<br>
> believe<br>
> > that anonymous contribution should be allowed while some<br>
> believes it should<br>
> > not.<br>
> ><br>
> > d.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Issues around having more than 1 PPM per<br>
> year and<br>
> > Online PPM because of volunteer burnout. We are all volunteers<br>
> and it?s a<br>
> > night job for us. More PPMs mean more time to volunteer and more<br>
> chances<br>
> > for burnouts<br>
> ><br>
> > e.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Some members of the Community thinks only<br>
> burning or<br>
> > polarizing issues should be brought to the PPM.<br>
> ><br>
> > Chairs Decision:? ?No Consensus<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > 2.? ? ? ?PDP Working Group<br>
> ><br>
> > This proposal aims at allowing most of the decisions including chair<br>
> > elections to be determined via consensus.? This can be<br>
> reasonable when the<br>
> > community has the same goal. However, there were a number of<br>
> objections to<br>
> > it. These are:<br>
> ><br>
> > a.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Entrusting the WG to make their decisions by<br>
> > consensus and the appointment of their co-chairs by consensus do<br>
> not make<br>
> > sense and is only utopic.<br>
> ><br>
> > b.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? People are not policy proposals, and thus<br>
> choosing by<br>
> > consensus is splitting hairs with the election process we<br>
> already have.<br>
> > Save the consensus for the proposals, and the election for people.<br>
> ><br>
> > c.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Consensus may even take months, and this<br>
> can?t fly<br>
> > when we want to put people in the vacant roles.<br>
> ><br>
> > d.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Co-chairs should not have a hand in the<br>
> consensus,<br>
> > but only sit back and let the community decide for themselves.<br>
> > Additionally, the consensus process is not feasible with a deadline.<br>
> ><br>
> > e.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Focus on polishing the current electoral process<br>
> > instead of complicating other untested forms of ?election?.<br>
> ><br>
> > f.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? The current status quo?s election should<br>
> be the<br>
> > only option in choosing for the roles, and not through less<br>
> transparent<br>
> > means.<br>
> ><br>
> > g.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Board would be interfering too much on<br>
> issues that<br>
> > deal with PDP<br>
> ><br>
> > Chairs Decision:? ? No Consensus<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > 3.? ? ? ?Chairs Election Process<br>
> ><br>
> > This proposal aims at introducing an online voting system for the<br>
> > Co-Chairs election. The following are the opposition to this<br>
> proposal.<br>
> ><br>
> > a.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?This policy reduces participation. Equal<br>
> > representation is violated because the board has unprecedented<br>
> power.<br>
> ><br>
> > b.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? There is also not enough information on the<br>
> logistics<br>
> > of the vote (e-voting).<br>
> ><br>
> > c.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?There is a contradiction on when the term ends<br>
> > during the meeting. ?The term ends during the first PPM<br>
> corresponding to<br>
> > the end of the term for which they were appointed? is not clear<br>
> enough, and<br>
> > ?A term may begin or end no sooner than the first day of the PPM<br>
> and no<br>
> > later than the last day of the PPM as determined by mutual<br>
> agreement of the<br>
> > current Chair and the new Chair? contradicts each other.<br>
> ><br>
> > d.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Gender restriction on 3.3.1.3 , some community<br>
> > members argue it is impractical and maybe even unfair if we<br>
> force both<br>
> > chairs to have different genders.<br>
> ><br>
> > e.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Issues around which voter's register should be<br>
> > adopted<br>
> ><br>
> > Chairs Decision: No Consensus<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > 4.? ? ? ?Board Prerogatives<br>
> ><br>
> > This proposal aims at clarifying how the board and the PDWG? works.<br>
> > However, there were a few oppositions to this proposal except for a<br>
> > specific section.<br>
> ><br>
> > a.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?It seems like a piecemeal approach to<br>
> dealing with<br>
> > issues.<br>
> ><br>
> > b.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Opposition to the section below<br>
> ><br>
> > *?As an exception of the preceding paragraph, in the absence of<br>
> elections<br>
> > processes for aspects related to the PDP (co-chairs, appeal<br>
> committee),<br>
> > those aspects will be still handled by the board in consultation<br>
> with the<br>
> > community. However, this is also a temporary measure and also<br>
> specific<br>
> > draft policy proposals should be introduced for that*?. The authors<br>
> > agreed to remove the above section hence<br>
> ><br>
> > Chairs Decision: Consensus provided the above section is removed<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > 5.? ? ? ?Policy Compliance Dashboard<br>
> ><br>
> > The policy proposal seeks to provide a framework or a policy<br>
> compliance<br>
> > dashboard be developed by AFRINIC and incorporated in myAFRINIC<br>
> (and future<br>
> > member?s communication platforms).? It will allow a periodic<br>
> review of the<br>
> > policy compliance status of each member. It will also enable<br>
> members to<br>
> > receive automated notifications for any issue. Staff will<br>
> receive repeated<br>
> > warnings of lack of compliance or severe violations enshrined in<br>
> the CPM.<br>
> > However, there are several oppositions to this proposal, such as:<br>
> ><br>
> > a.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?This policy seems to be redundant of the<br>
> status quo<br>
> > as violations are already checked and processed by the human staff.<br>
> ><br>
> > b.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? There is already an existing system of<br>
> guidelines on<br>
> > keeping track of the violations of members.<br>
> ><br>
> > c.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?The policy is not binding and does not enforce<br>
> > members actually to follow the rules and not violate policies.<br>
> ><br>
> > d.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Ignorance could be a convenient excuse for<br>
> violations<br>
> > because one could claim that they never got notified about their<br>
> violations.<br>
> ><br>
> > e.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? There is no comprehensive system on how the<br>
> board<br>
> > should take proper actions once members violate policies, nor<br>
> does it give<br>
> > guidelines based on the severity of the violations.<br>
> ><br>
> > f.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? This policy takes away resources that<br>
> could be used<br>
> > for more beneficial pursuits to AFRINIC for something existing<br>
> in the<br>
> > system.<br>
> ><br>
> > g.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?It an administrative? process, and this<br>
> should be<br>
> > left to staff<br>
> ><br>
> > Chairs Decision:? NO rough Consensus<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > 6.? ? ? ?Abuse Contact Update<br>
> ><br>
> > The proposal makes it mandatory for AFRINIC to include in each<br>
> resource<br>
> > registration, a contact where network abuse from users of those<br>
> resources<br>
> > will be reported.? The proposal whois DB attribute (abuse-c) to<br>
> be used to<br>
> > publish abuse public contact information. There?s also a process<br>
> to ensure<br>
> > that the recipient must receive abuse report and that contacts are<br>
> > validated by AFRINIC regularly. However, there some opposition<br>
> to the<br>
> > proposal there are:<br>
> ><br>
> > a.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Staff analysis on how it affects legacy<br>
> holder not<br>
> > conclusive? (not sure why this should affect legacy holders)<br>
> ><br>
> > b.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? The proposal doesn?t state what will be the<br>
> > consequences of one member fails to comply. Why are we creating<br>
> the abuse<br>
> > contact when there is no consequence for not providing the abuse<br>
> contact<br>
> ><br>
> > c.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Abuse contact email and issues with GDPR<br>
> concerning<br>
> > the whois database<br>
> ><br>
> > d.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? No proper definition of the term Abuse<br>
> ><br>
> > e.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? To force members to reply to their abuse<br>
> email is not<br>
> > in the scope of AFRINIC.<br>
> ><br>
> > Chairs Decision: No rough consensus<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > 7.? ? ? ?RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned AFRINIC<br>
> Address Space<br>
> ><br>
> > The proposal instructs AFRINIC to create ROAs for all<br>
> unallocated and<br>
> > unassigned address space under its control. This will enable<br>
> networks<br>
> > performing RPKI-based BGP Origin Validation to easily reject all<br>
> the bogon<br>
> > announcements covering resources managed by AFRINIC. However,<br>
> there are<br>
> > many oppositions such as:<br>
> ><br>
> > a.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Allowing resource holders to create AS0/<br>
> ROA will<br>
> > lead to an increase of even more invalid prefixes in the routing<br>
> table.<br>
> ><br>
> > b.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Revocation time of AS0 state, and the time<br>
> for new<br>
> > allocation doesn?t match.<br>
> ><br>
> > c.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Other RIRs don?t have a similar the policy<br>
> > therefore, it can not be effective<br>
> ><br>
> > d.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? This will become a uniform policy if it is not<br>
> > globally implemented, which causes additional stress.<br>
> ><br>
> > e.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Validity period:? ?if members decide to<br>
> implement it,<br>
> > is it not better to recover the space if it is kept unused for<br>
> too long?<br>
> ><br>
> > f.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? How do we revoke the ROA? How long does it<br>
> take to<br>
> > revoke it (chain/ refreshing )?<br>
> ><br>
> > g.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?What happens if AFRINIC accidentally issues<br>
> a ROA<br>
> > for an address in error?<br>
> ><br>
> > h.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? It also might affect the neighbours and involves<br>
> > monitoring of unallocated spaces.<br>
> ><br>
> > i.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Possibility of it being used against a<br>
> member who<br>
> > is yet to pay dues.<br>
> ><br>
> > Suggestions were made to improve the policy such as<br>
> ><br>
> > a)? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? The automatic creation of AS0 ROAs should be<br>
> limited<br>
> > to space that has never been allocated by an RIR or part of a legacy<br>
> > allocation.<br>
> ><br>
> > b)? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? AFRINIC should require the explicit consent<br>
> of the<br>
> > previous holder to issue AS0 ROAs in respect of re-claimed,<br>
> returned, etc,<br>
> > space.<br>
> ><br>
> > c)? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Any ROAs issued under this policy should be<br>
> issued<br>
> > and published in a way that makes it operationally easy for a<br>
> relying party<br>
> > to ignore them (probably by issuing under a separate TA).<br>
> ><br>
> > d)? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? The proposal should include the clause ?as<br>
> used in<br>
> > APNIC as to dues not paid on time.?<br>
> ><br>
> > Chairs Decision: No consensus<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > 8.? ? ? ?IPv4 Inter-RIR Resource Transfers (Comprehensive Scope)<br>
> ><br>
> > The proposal puts in place a mechanism to transfer IPv4 and<br>
> (some ASN)<br>
> > resources between AFRINIC and other RIRs and between AFRINIC<br>
> > members/entities. Some conditions are attached to the source and<br>
> recipient<br>
> > based on need and disclosure made. The inter-RIR transfers will be<br>
> > suspended if the number of outgoing IPv4 addresses exceeds the<br>
> incoming<br>
> > ones for six consecutive months. However, there are oppositions<br>
> to it<br>
> ><br>
> > a.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?ASN Transfer is not necessary<br>
> ><br>
> > b.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Issue of board inferring: no board in all of<br>
> the five<br>
> > RIRs have ever been involved in deciding a transfer or allocating IP<br>
> > address. It is not the board's responsibility.<br>
> ><br>
> > c.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Suspending clause with no reinstalling<br>
> clause. This<br>
> > mainly makes the policy potentially invalid.<br>
> ><br>
> > Chairs Decision: No consensus.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > 9.? ? ? ?AFRINIC Number Resource Transfer<br>
> ><br>
> > a.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Not realistic for one-way inter RIR resource<br>
> > transfer as it has to be reciprocal. One way would never happen<br>
> as only<br>
> > global resources can come in and go out<br>
> ><br>
> > b.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? It would be difficult for the recipient to<br>
> follow the<br>
> > rules of AFRINIC if they are not in the African region.<br>
> ><br>
> > c.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?No need for ASN transfer. If one is moving<br>
> regions<br>
> > and doesn't have an ASN in the new region, it can request and<br>
> receive from<br>
> > the local RIRs<br>
> ><br>
> > d.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Additional attributes create none-operational<br>
> > complexity in the whois database.<br>
> ><br>
> > Chairs Decision: No consensus.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > 10.? ?Resource Transfer Policy<br>
> ><br>
> > This proposal aims to introduce Inter RIR transfer. However, it<br>
> has the<br>
> > following opposition<br>
> ><br>
> > a.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Issues with Legacy holder transfer is<br>
> potentially<br>
> > considered none-reciprocal by ARIN<br>
> ><br>
> > b.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Potential abuse of AFRINIC free pool without<br>
> the time<br>
> > limit of receiving an allocation from AFRINIC.<br>
> ><br>
> > Chairs Decision: The proposal is the least contested of all the 3<br>
> > competing proposals. However because of the community?s desire<br>
> and clear<br>
> > expression for the? need for an Inter RIR transfer, we, the<br>
> Co-chairs,<br>
> > believe that in the interest of the community we should focus on<br>
> a proposal<br>
> > rather than several similar ones. This desire was clearly<br>
> expressed at the<br>
> > AFRINIC 31 meeting in Angola. Therefore, We suggest that the<br>
> authors of<br>
> > this proposal make the following amendments:<br>
> ><br>
> > ?? ? ? ? ?5.7.3.2? Source entities are not eligible to receive<br>
> further<br>
> > IPv4 allocations or assignments from AFRINIC for 12 months<br>
> period after the<br>
> > transfer.<br>
> ><br>
> > ?? ? ? ? ?5.7.4.3. Transferred legacy resources will still be<br>
> regarded as<br>
> > legacy resources.<br>
> ><br>
> > Chairs Decision: Provided that the above are amended, the<br>
> decisions is<br>
> > Rough Consensus is achieved<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > Based on the above, The updated version of the follow proposal which<br>
> > achieved rough consensus would be posted on the PDWG website<br>
> ><br>
> > *1.? ? ? ?**Board Prerogatives *<br>
> ><br>
> > *2.? ? ? ?**Resource Transfer Policy*<br>
> ><br>
> > Therefore, these two policies are now on last call.<br>
> ><br>
> > Co-Chair<br>
> > PDWG<br>
> ><br>
> > Website <<a href="http://www.unilorin.edu.ng" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.unilorin.edu.ng</a><br>
> <<a href="http://www.unilorin.edu.ng" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.unilorin.edu.ng</a>>>, Weekly Bulletin<br>
> > <<a href="http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/bulletin" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/bulletin</a><br>
> <<a href="http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/bulletin" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/bulletin</a>>> UGPortal<br>
> > <<a href="http://uilugportal.unilorin.edu.ng/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://uilugportal.unilorin.edu.ng/</a><br>
> <<a href="http://uilugportal.unilorin.edu.ng/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://uilugportal.unilorin.edu.ng/</a>>> PGPortal<br>
> > <<a href="https://uilpgportal.unilorin.edu.ng/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://uilpgportal.unilorin.edu.ng/</a><br>
> <<a href="https://uilpgportal.unilorin.edu.ng/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://uilpgportal.unilorin.edu.ng/</a>>><br>
> ><br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > RPD mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a>><br>
> > <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
> <<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>><br>
> ><br>
> -------------- next part --------------<br>
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
> URL:<br>
> <<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200925/a8a5d980/attachment.html" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200925/a8a5d980/attachment.html</a><br>
> <<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200925/a8a5d980/attachment.html" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200925/a8a5d980/attachment.html</a>>><br>
><br>
> ------------------------------<br>
><br>
> Subject: Digest Footer<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> RPD mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a>><br>
> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
> <<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>><br>
><br>
><br>
> ------------------------------<br>
><br>
> End of RPD Digest, Vol 168, Issue 213<br>
> *************************************<br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> RPD mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200925/1e6effea/attachment.html" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200925/1e6effea/attachment.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Subject: Digest Footer<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
End of RPD Digest, Vol 168, Issue 219<br>
*************************************<br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
</blockquote></div>