<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">dear all,</div><div style="color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div><div style="color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div><div style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">Without being catastrophic, I believe that the activities for which the African economy requires resources are mostly different from Latin America, and differently should be managed.</div><div style="color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div><div style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">We cannot predict when it will happen, and this should be the main reason to solve the problem now that we have time to manage it properly.</div><div style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">The resource transfer policy proposed by Anthony and Taiwo aims to build a stable and effective resources management system for the Afrinic service region. If we start working for the resource problem now, no matter of issues that will potentially come up (like with any other policy), there will be space to improve them in the future.</div><div style="color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div><div style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">regards,</div><div style="color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div><div style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">Lucilla </div></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Il giorno lun 28 set 2020 alle ore 10:02 Fernando Frediani <<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com">fhfrediani@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>
<p>There is no "information" between quotes. If you don't believe in
it check on LACNIC website on your own.</p>
<p>What a terrible scenario is painted here where it could be
"terrible" not having a Inter-RIR transfer policy as soon as
possible.<br>
There is still IP space at a lower pace and there are internal
transfers. Clearly a Inter-RIR transfer can wait a few more months
in order to get it right rather than rush and get a bad policy.
Co-Chairs deciding "the region needs a transfer policy" shows
there is some rush in it that can be delayed if they re-think and
bring it back to discussion to try to really find a rough
consensus which is far form existing right now.<br>
</p>
<p>It is not correct this proposal "works very well". There are
serious doubts, lacks confirmation from staff and other RIRs and
there has been a very serious change in the very last minute not
giving anyone else chance to discuss. So clearly this proposal is
far from ready to reach consensus.</p>
<p>Fernando<br>
</p>
<div>On 26/09/2020 01:53, Ibeanusi Elvis
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
@Fernando,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If you are said you never mentioned not to do anything, what
then are you implying by saying that “It took LACNIC 3years and
6months before they ran out completely”. So we should wait for
ours to almost run out and drag the process along before we do
something about it? This scenario is not as terrible? Rethink
and review the scenario again, judging by the “information” you
gave to us using LACNIC, it might not have been bad or terrible
for them, but it might be for us. They might have survived but
we might not. Put that into consideration as well. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Also, the Resource Transfer Policy proposed by Anthony and
Taiwo works very well and there is no rush into anything. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The outcome might not be the same for everyone. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Elvis<br>
<br>
<div dir="ltr">Sent from my iPhone</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<blockquote type="cite">On Sep 26, 2020, at 13:03, Fernando
Frediani <a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" target="_blank"><fhfrediani@gmail.com></a> wrote:<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<p>I never mentioned "not do to anything", just to get the
things right rather than rush,even if it takes a couple of
more months.<br>
It is much worst to get a bad policy than have none. The
examples I put was to show that this scenario is not as
terrible as some people are putting as almost if the
internet was going to stop work if this policy doesn't
advance.<br>
</p>
<p>Even if it takes a couple more of months to get that
things right and out of this mess it will not be a big
deal at all for the region.<br>
It's not true this proposal works. It still lacks
confirmations specially from other RIRs.<br>
"Many more years" is of course an exaggeration on your
side and we are talking about months rather than years
which surely will not hurt.</p>
<p>The legacy stuff is currently like this: it loses its
status, it is like this in other places as well which
shows this is the obvious thing to keep. This was never
mentioned in the discussion of this proposal for months
and changed at the very last minute which gives no chance
to others to equally oppose. If there is something to be
discussed in another proposal is if the current status
should change or not, not what is being trying to be done
at rush.<br>
</p>
<p>There is no "forcing them to lose their legacy status".
Whoever sell them don't care other than the money they
receive. Whoever receives is only interested in the usage
of the resources. What is being said about this is not
correct how things really are in practical.<br>
</p>
<p>Fernando<br>
</p>
<div>On 26/09/2020 00:47, Ibeanusi
Elvis wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
Dear Fernando,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>"When LACNIC transitioned from Phase 2 to
Phase 3 of the exhaustion phases which is very similar
to what just happened to AfriNic Phase 2, it took
exactly <b>3 years and 6 months</b> for it to
be completely empty”. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>According to what you are insinuating, it is
preferable not to do anything about the resources which
are still going to exhaust. Thats makes no sense, it
will be better if preparations are made prior to the
entire exhaustion of the resources. LACNIC might have
lasted 3 years and 6months before it completely emptied
that does not mean we should take the same route as
them, you learn from others not entirely copy their
system or mode of handling things.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Additionally, “good or not organisation
survived, found their way to work with this new scenario
now there is a proper and well discussed proposal that
works well for everybody and allow in and out transfer
from ALL other RIRs”</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The fact that the organisation survived does
not 100% imply that if the same system of waiting till
everything ends entirely is applied, AFRINIC will
survive. It is best to take early necessary precautions
and not wait till when we are in a desperate and maybe
unsurvivable state before we do something. Also, this
proposal is well detailed and works. Waiting for many
more years and years of discussion is just compounding
the staffs of the AFRINIC organisation and the community
with excessive work as well. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regarding the legacy resource holders, it is
better to have a dedicated legacy proposal for them and
work with them not forcing them to lose their legacy
status. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Elvis</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>Consider that LACNIC has a much
higher demand than AfriNic and during most of
these 3 years it survived without a Inter-RIR
policy that was discussed for quiet a while
before it reached consensus, plus the time it
took for it to be implemented by staff which
happened just recently in middle of this year.On
Sep 26, 2020, at 11:39, Fernando Frediani <<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" target="_blank">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br>
<div>
<div>
<p>A couple of information for those
who are scary about "the pool be empty
shortly".</p>
<p>When LACNIC transitioned from
Phase 2 to Phase 3 of the exhaustion phases
which is very similar to what just happened
to AfriNic Phase 2, it took exactly <b>3 years and 6 months</b> for it
to be completely empty. <br>
Consider that LACNIC has a much higher
demand than AfriNic and during most of these
3 years it survived without a Inter-RIR
policy that was discussed for quiet a while
before it reached consensus, plus the time
it took for it to be implemented by staff
which happened just recently in middle of
this year.</p>
<p>Good or not organizations
survived, found their way to work with this
new scenario e now there is a proper and
well discussed proposal that work well for
everybody and allow in and out transfer from
ALL other RIRs. And by the way legacy
resources lose its status like is expected.
<br>
And by the way, there is absolutely no
"fight" with legacy resource holders, not at
all. They don't care what will happen when
they sell their resources on sold. Whoever
is buying are not really much interested in
this status, but in acquiring them for their
usage and that's it.<br>
</p>
<p>AfriNic can take some more time,
specially in the current uncertainty
scenario to get a proper and better
discussed proposal that will in fact be
reciprocal to all other RIRs and benefit the
region to keep going after the pool is
completely empty which still takes some
time.</p>
<p>Fernando<br>
</p>
<div>On 25/09/2020
22:08, lucilla fornaro wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Dear all,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Accepting this policy
implies that AFRINIC will develop a
way to get even more resources to
satisfy and push the demand of the
developing market. </div>
<div>We often talked about
smoother business (why the community
is so scared about this word?)
operations, the policy does not
facilitate any fraud. All resources
are allocated and transferred in the
base of a proven need. It is an
expensive process, and it is
reasonable to think that no one would
operate a fraud that causes loss
instead of benefits.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Yes, shortly the pool will
be empty, but the policy proposes a
way to fight it and promote access to
further resources before it's too
late.</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 09:49
Ibeanusi Elvis <<a href="mailto:ibeanusielvis@gmail.com" target="_blank">ibeanusielvis@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 style="word-wrap:break-word">Dear Marcus, Dear Community,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I do not concur with
your analogy and accusations on the
proposal or policy written by
Anthony Ikechukwu Ubah and Taiwo
Oyewande called “Resource Transfer
Policy” as being a hindrance to the
smooth operation of business, is
entirely false. The major intention
of this policy is to support and
boost businesses i Africa not to
hinder the operation of business.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Likewise, the policy is
not based on a fake problem of the
African region. This is baseless
accusation and a wrong
self-interpretation of what factual
intentions of the Resource Transfer
Policy, Anthony and Taiwo should be
appreciated for pointing out this
issue. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On the other hand, "<i><span lang="EN-US"><font face="tahoma, sans-serif">Basically,
the Resource Transfer Policy
is intended to take Internet
Resources on one region to the
other. We all know that Africa
is at its developing stage and
needs more internet resources
to support its developmental
process. Accepting this policy
means that the little
resources left in our region
will be taken away, especially
when we don’t have the
mechanism in place to enforce
the auditing of the use of the
allocated resources.</font></span></i><font face="tahoma, sans-serif"><i>”</i></font></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><font face="tahoma, sans-serif"><i>The purpose of this
policy is to support a “TWO-WAY
INTER-RIR POLICY” which implies
that AFRINIC can receive and
transfer resources. With the
exhaustion of the IPv4, the
adoption of this policy will do
a greater good to the
African continent as it supports
the circulation of resources
into and out of all the RIRs </i></font></div>
<div><font face="tahoma, sans-serif"><i><br>
</i></font></div>
<div><font face="tahoma, sans-serif"><i>Best, </i></font></div>
<div><font face="tahoma, sans-serif"><i>Elvis</i></font></div>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Sep 26,
2020, at 02:24, Taiwo
Oyewande <<a href="mailto:taiwo.oyewande88@gmail.com" target="_blank">taiwo.oyewande88@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br>
<div>
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="ltr">Hi
all,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Discussing
a problem statement
that will not be
implemented in the
CPM is not really
taking us forward. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>There is
an obvious war
against the co
chairs for doing a
job that the
community mandated
them to do by the
status of their
election. The
co-chairs discussed
each points raised
with the various
authors and tried to
see if all the
points were duly
addressed before
making their
decisions. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I saw a
false and misleading
statement about the
cochairs trying to
get the authors of 2
of the 3 related
policies against the
authors of the 3rd
policy. Is this what
members of this
working group has
turned to?</div>
<div>Trying
to create a bad name
for another member
using scenarios that
never occurred. I
think that is the
height of
desperation and such
defamation of
character should not
be encouraged on
this list</div>
<div><br>
<div dir="ltr">Taiwo</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<blockquote type="cite">On 25
Sep 2020, at
14:17, Marcus K.
G. Adomey <<a href="mailto:madomey@hotmail.com" target="_blank">madomey@hotmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div id="gmail-m_40752282362891982gmail-m_1467110844684016632appendonsend" style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt">
</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt"> Dear
all,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The
Policy
“Resource
Transfer
Policy”
(AFPUB-2019-V4-003-DRAFT01)
proposed by
Anthony
Ikechukwu Ubah
and Taiwo
Oyewande is
based on a
fake problem
for our
region.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(1)
“The current
policy fails
to support a
two-way
Inter-RIR
policy” – And
so what? This
was an
intra-RIR
transfer
policy, not
meant to be
Inter-RIR</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(2)
“there by
hindering
smooth
business
operation”</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Can
the authors of
the policy
show how the
current
situation is
“hindering
smooth
business
operation?”</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Further,
they should
tell us what
they mean by
“smooth
business
operation”.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(3)
“development
and growth in
the region”</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Can
the authors of
the policy
prove that the
current status
is hindering
“development
and growth in
the region”?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It
is clear that
the authors of
the policy
have used
unsubstantiated
claims to
buttress the
need for this
policy.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Basically,
the Resource
Transfer
Policy is
intended to
take Internet
Resources on
one region to
the other. We
all know that
Africa is at
its developing
stage and
needs more
internet
resources to
support its
developmental
process.
Accepting this
policy means
that the
little
resources left
in our region
will be taken
away,
especially
when we don’t
have the
mechanism in
place to
enforce the
auditing of
the use of the
allocated
resources.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Moreover,
any unmanaged
inter-RIR
transfer
policy will
weaken the
development of
the Internet
in the region
as we have no
control over
this global
market which
never played
in our favor.
It may also
affect AFRINIC
operations.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Recent
findings
discussed on
this list show
how
transferred
resources are
being used.
The global
community is
yet to discuss
the impact on
transfer. I am
more concerned
for our
region.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Reconsider
your decision
and let us
discuss the
best approach
to engage the
Region into
the global
resources
transfer
world.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Marcus</div>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt"> <br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt"> <br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt"> <br>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%">
<div id="gmail-m_40752282362891982gmail-m_1467110844684016632divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font style="font-size:11pt" face="Calibri, sans-serif"><b>From:</b>
Murungi Daniel
<<a href="mailto:dmurungi@wia.co.tz" target="_blank">dmurungi@wia.co.tz</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b>
Wednesday,
September 23,
2020 8:59 PM<br>
<b>To:</b>
rpd >>
AfriNIC
Resource
Policy <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b>
Re: [rpd]
Transfer
Policy
Proposal
v.3.docx</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div><font size="2">Hello,</font></div>
<div><font size="2"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font size="2">Can
the authors of
the resource
transfer
policy in the
last call
explain, which
problem is
being
addressed?<br>
<br>
The problem
statement
is awkward to
say the least.
The issue with
the problem
statement was
raised in
Luanda and
during the
virtual AIS.
How can we can
adopt a
proposal when
the
problem statement
is out of
scope of the
PDP?<br>
<br>
——-<br>
1. Summary of
the problem
being
addressed by
this proposal<br>
The current
policy fails
to support a
two-way
Inter-RIR
policy,
thereby
hindering
smooth
business
operation,
development,
and growth in
the region.
This proposal
aims to
establish an
efficient and
business-friendly mechanism to allow a number of resources to be
transferred
from/to other
regions. This
proposal
outlines a
model in which
AFRINIC can
freely
transfer
number
resources
to/from other
regions, i.e.
RIPE NCC,
APNIC, ARIN
and LACNIC.
This includes
both
IPv4 addresses
and AS
numbers.<br>
——-<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></div>
<div><font size="2">Regards,</font></div>
<div><font size="2"><br>
Murungi Daniel</font></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On
Sep 23, 2020,
at 10:39 PM,
Fernando
Frediani <<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" target="_blank">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br>
<div>
<div>
<p>Hello</p>
<p>There
is no much I
can do other
than state my
<b>opposition
to this
proposal</b>
to advance and
reach any
consensus
mainly because
5.7.4.3 has
been inverted
from what was
originally in
the proposal
and only
changed at
last minute
due to some
comments in
the PPM going
straight to
last call
which didn't
give
opportunity to
the community
re-evaluate
this major
change and if
it's suitable
to the region
or not.</p>
<p>Co-Chairs
cannot advance
this proposal
to rough
consensus the
way it is and
I urge and ask
them again to
bring it back
to discussion
to find out a
resolution to
these opened
issues.
Multiple
people raised
substantial
concerns about
it already.
There is no
way it can be
considered
'rough
consensus'.</p>
<p>I
also
understand
there may be a
hurry to get a
Inter-RIR
transfer
policy as soon
as possible,
but we must
care about
what is most
important than
that which is
get policies
to reflect
what is really
good for the
region and not
just to a few
actors, even
if it takes a
bit longer. I
support
Jordi's
suggestion to
have another
PPM in a few
months so
perhaps this
proposal can
advance from
that point in
time. LACNIC
remained about
2 years
without a
Inter-RIR
transfer
policy after
it run out of
addresses for
new
organizations
and survived.
AfriNic will
survive if it
has to wait a
few more
months in
order to get
things really
right.</p>
<p>Now
going to the
merit of the
proposal
specially the
main point I
oppose
(5.7.4.3):<br>
There is no
sense at all
to keep
considering
transferred
legacy
resources as
legacy. This
doesn't work
that way and
has a proper
reason to be
like that
which is fix a
historical
internet
problem and
reduce legacy
resources with
time as they
get
transferred to
'normal'
organizations
who purchased
them in the
market for
example.<br>
In this way
organizations
receiving
these
resources are
bind to the
same rules
everybody else
making it much
fair to
everybody and
making no
distinction
between
members.<br>
Allowing
resources to
remain
considered
legacy only
contributed to
abuses and
unfairness
allowing those
who can pay
more do
whatever they
like which is
bad for the
rest of the
Internet
community
which are
subject to the
same rules
that apply
equally to
them.<br>
If transferred
legacy
resources are
not considered
legacy anymore
more and more
they will
apply equally
for everybody
as they become
as a normal
resource
within any
RIR. There has
been a strong
reason for
this be like
that until now
and to
continue like
that.<br>
</p>
<p>Regards<br>
Fernando<br>
</p>
<div>On
23/09/2020
09:49, JORDI
PALET MARTINEZ
via RPD wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Hi Taiwo, all,
I've looked into the doc.
Let me say something before going into a more detailed analysis: I *fully support* this proposal, and I will be happy to withdraw it once:
1) The staff confirms that all the points on the staff analysis have been cleared and thus, the policy could be implemented and will be functional in the intended purpose.
2) The board ratifies the policy (which means also it passes the last call).
Why? If anything in the process fails, I still believe my proposal is clearer and never mind is my proposal or this one I'm happy to work with the authors to make sure to resolve the issues that may happen as indicated in 1 and 2 above (hopefully there are no issues).
I've now a more detailed analysis, please really, needs to be taken seriously with the staff or we may ruin the policy and not allow to be functional.
There is something which doesn't make sense: The text in point 5.7. The CPM should be read always as "actual" so "soon will exhaust ..." is not logic, neither needed for the purpose of this policy. In addition, there are typos there ...
This is an editorial change that according to the PDP should be possible as part of the last call. I will suggest to keep it simple:
5.7 IPv4 Resources transfer
This policy applies to an organization with a justified need for IPv4 resources (recipients) and organizations with IPv4 resources which no longer need (sources).
I see that the "disputes" issue has been resolved! Tks! Anyway, I think there is another editorial problem there.
Actual text:
5.7.3.1 The source must be the current rightful holder of the IPv4 address resources registered with any RIR, and shall be in compliance with the policies of the receiving RIR, and shall not be involved in any dispute as to the status of those resources.
I suggest:
5.7.3.1 The source must be the current rightful holder of the IPv4 address resources registered with any RIR, in compliance with the relevant policies, and shall not be involved in any dispute as to the status of those resources.
Keeping the "policies of the receiving RIR" is contradictory ... changing it with "relevant policies" allows both RIRs to ensure that everything is correct.
Grammar maybe, I'm not English native speaker:
"for 12 months period" or "for a 12 months period"
I think 5.7.3.3. doesn't add any value, it could be removed and doesn't change anything: if there is no limite, no need to mention it. If there is not agreement, clearly the transfer will not happen because the parties don't authorize it, and then the RIR(s) don't authorize it!
Similarly 5.7.4.2. could be removed as well. We already said that the recipient should comply with policies (5.7.3.1), so what is this adding? Just superfluous text.
Note also my imputs in the previous email, regarding the hold period and the legacy status. I think 5.7.4.3, should be "IPv4 legacy resources "Transferred incoming or within AFRINIC IPv4 legacy resources will no longer be regarded as legacy resources".
5.7.5.1 is already indicated by the staff as something problematic with the actual wording. The transferring party (the source) may not have any relation (not a member) with the receiving RIR. With this text we are enforcing *all the RIRs* to offer a standard template and process on our mandate. WE CAN'T DO THAT. Our policies only have a mandate in AFRINIC, not in the other RIRs.
If we just remove section 5.7.5, and leave it to the staff as part of the operational procedure, the the problem is resolved because the existing process among the all other 4 RIRs for transfers will be "joined" by AFRINIC. It is just a matter of interconection among systems and processes!
I think all this should be carefully studied among the authors and the staff and the chairs should make sure that the verstion coming to last call has corrected all those issues.
I hope all this is useful.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 23/9/20 9:38, "Taiwo Oyewande" <a href="mailto:taiwo.oyewande88@gmail.com" target="_blank"><taiwo.oyewande88@gmail.com></a> escribió:
Hello PDWG,
Attached is the updated version of the Resource Transfer Policy proposal. As recommended, changes have been effected on sub-section 5.7.3.2, and 5.7.4.3 according to the co-chair summary.
_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
<a href="http://www.theipv6company.com/" target="_blank">http://www.theipv6company.com</a>
The IPv6 Company
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.
_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</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" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<span>_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span>RPD
mailing list</span><br>
<span><a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a></span><br>
<span><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a></span><br>
</div>
</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" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</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>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</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" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</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>