<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman \(Cuerpo en alfa";
panose-1:2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML con formato previo Car";
margin:0cm;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.HTMLconformatoprevioCar
{mso-style-name:"HTML con formato previo Car";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML con formato previo";
font-family:Consolas;}
span.EstiloCorreo21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 3.0cm 70.85pt 3.0cm;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:29261705;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-2013655180 67764241 67764249 67764251 67764239 67764249 67764251 67764239 67764249 67764251;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-text:"%1\)";
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=ES link=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>I don’t need to look into the video again. I was there, I recall all the details, I also understand Marcus point but we need to put everything in the right time and context, and recognize all the historic facts at the same time BUT look into what is best for the community:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><ol style='margin-top:0cm' start=1 type=1><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>My Inter-RIR proposal was the first one.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>I think the *<b>minimum</b>* that people that don’t like a proposal should do, *<b>before submitting a competitive proposal</b>*, is to talk in the list and/or in private with the authors of an earlier proposal to try to agree. As an example of what I think is the right behavior: I did that before the Dakar meeting, for a completely different topic (it doesn’t matter for this discussion), and only after not having reaction from the authors in months and meeting them in Dakar, I submitted my “competing” proposal . Then I withdraw it in Hammamet under the promise from the authors that they will this time take it – nothing happened.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>So, what I would have expected for proposal 2 and 3 authors is to first contact me to try to resolve it. Specially because one of the authors of one of those proposals was the one telling me in Hammamet that I was not doing right competing to them and “I was just a guest there …” (and no code of conduct was applied). Not nice. Even in that situation, I’m always be very happy, as I’ve said many times, to work with other committed authors. People that respond to emails, people that really want the good of the community, *<b>even</b>* if this is against their own personal views. I’ve demonstrated many times, that I’ve supported points or even complete proposals that I was personally against, but I recognize it was the good of the community.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Nevertheless, all that *<b>doesn’t care at all</b>*. Proposals are not about authors, are about what is the best for the community!<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>This is why my proposal has aspects that I was not agreeing or considering necessary, such as the ASN or the security belt: because I was hearing the community inputs. Consequently, I’ve been always happy to incorporate or remove or reword any points if that means reaching consensus in something that is good for the community. Of course, if I strongly believe that is “bad” I will try to find a middle-agreement point. This is what *<b>consensus</b>* means!<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Before Luanda, co-chairs, staff and other authors can confirm, I’ve tried to find an agreement, organize a call, or even a meeting in Luanda among all (before the PPM), etc. and have a single proposal (note that I’m not saying this or that proposal, just something in common). I’ve even met in person one of the authors in the previous IETF, he got no time for trying to fix it. There was no way to agree. Somehow, I was thinking that one of the proposals was closer to what I think is the best for the community - again, NOT FOR ME, I’m irrelevant – I can “concede” (the latin original meaning of consensus) in what is not essential for me, if it is still good for the community.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>I’ve been always open to keep finding an agreement and this is why I keep trying to fix, at the moment, not my proposal, but the one that looks closer to what is best to the community *<b>even if is not my proposal – doesn’t care!</b>*.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>If we can’t resolve this now, I will proceed again with my proposal unless we can find a common agreement of what is the *<b>best for the community</b>*, not any authors personal preferences, not subjective views of anyone and 1<sup>st</sup> respecting as much as we can the actual policy because some members already used that one and will not be fair that they now are “losers” in front of who is coming later (unless as part of the proposal we can give them back the same benefits).<o:p></o:p></span></li></ol><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>So please, let’s stop subjective considerations, including “this is not the right problem statement”, and many others, and concentrate in getting it right *<b>for the best of the community</b>*, being fair with all the parties as much as we can, including those that already applied to the actual CPM.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Jordi<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>@jordipalet<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>El 29/9/20 11:05, "lucilla fornaro" <<a href="mailto:lucillafornarosawamoto@gmail.com">lucillafornarosawamoto@gmail.com</a>> escribió:<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Dear Marcus,<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>I have watched the video that you linked carefully. I don't see how it can be relevant now. The video was uploaded 9 months ago, and it concerns another discussion. It is pointless for the current one.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>How is the co-chairs' behavior defamatory? There is no damaging of the good reputation of anyone.<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>regards,<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Lucilla<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Il giorno mar 29 set 2020 alle ore 17:34 Marcus K. G. Adomey <<a href="mailto:madomey@hotmail.com">madomey@hotmail.com</a>> ha scritto:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm'><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'>Hi Taiwo,<o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'>If you watch the video below from section 3:07:30 - 3:11:00, you will notice that the cochairs attempted to force Jordi to drop his proposal and support Taiwo/Anthony proposal and then asked Taiwo/Anthony to drop theirs to support Jordi and both groups refused. The cochairs then suggested that the two can work together only to be told by remote participant that this is not how the PDP works and the cochairs then asked for staff analysis.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'>This was a clear violation of the PDP by cochairs by attempting to force authors of 1st and 2nd proposals to work together knowing very well there is a 3rd similar proposal.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'>Defamation is easy to prove within an open and transparent process.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'>Link: <a href="https://youtu.be/DF0AFeaNiS0" target="_blank">https://youtu.be/DF0AFeaNiS0</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt;background:white'><span style='color:#212121'>Marcus<o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-left:35.4pt;text-align:center'><hr size=0 width="100%" align=center></div><div id="gmail-m_6566711624436853170divRplyFwdMsg"><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><b><span style='color:black'>From:</span></b><span style='color:black'> Taiwo Oyewande <<a href="mailto:taiwo.oyewande88@gmail.com" target="_blank">taiwo.oyewande88@gmail.com</a>><br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, September 25, 2020 5:24:07 PM<br><b>To:</b> Marcus K. G. Adomey <<a href="mailto:madomey@hotmail.com" target="_blank">madomey@hotmail.com</a>>; Noah <<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz" target="_blank">noah@neo.co.tz</a>><br><b>Cc:</b> Murungi Daniel <<a href="mailto:dmurungi@wia.co.tz" target="_blank">dmurungi@wia.co.tz</a>>; 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</span> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Hi all, <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Discussing a problem statement that will not be implemented in the CPM is not really taking us forward. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Taiwo<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:35.4pt'>On 25 Sep 2020, at 14:17, Marcus K. G. Adomey <<a href="mailto:madomey@hotmail.com" target="_blank">madomey@hotmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Dear all, <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>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.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>(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<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>(2) “there by hindering smooth business operation”<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Can the authors of the policy show how the current situation is “hindering smooth business operation?”<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Further, they should tell us what they mean by “smooth business operation”.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>(3) “development and growth in the region”<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Can the authors of the policy prove that the current status is hindering “development and growth in the region”?<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>It is clear that the authors of the policy have used unsubstantiated claims to buttress the need for this policy.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>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.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>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.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>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.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Reconsider your decision and let us discuss the best approach to engage the Region into the global resources transfer world.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Marcus<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-left:35.4pt;text-align:center'><hr size=0 width="100%" align=center></div><div id="gmail-m_6566711624436853170x_divRplyFwdMsg"><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><b><span style='color:black'>From:</span></b><span style='color:black'> 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</span> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>Hello,</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>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></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>Regards,</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt'><br>Murungi Daniel</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>On Sep 23, 2020, at 10:39 PM, Fernando Frediani <<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" target="_blank">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Hello<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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'.<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Regards<br>Fernando<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>On 23/09/2020 09:49, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Hi Taiwo, all,<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>I've looked into the doc.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>2) The board ratifies the policy (which means also it passes the last call).<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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).<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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 ...<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>5.7 IPv4 Resources transfer<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>This policy applies to an organization with a justified need for IPv4 resources (recipients) and organizations with IPv4 resources which no longer need (sources).<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>I see that the "disputes" issue has been resolved! Tks! Anyway, I think there is another editorial problem there.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Actual text:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>I suggest:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Keeping the "policies of the receiving RIR" is contradictory ... changing it with "relevant policies" allows both RIRs to ensure that everything is correct.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Grammar maybe, I'm not English native speaker:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>"for 12 months period" or "for a 12 months period"<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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!<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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".<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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!<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>I hope all this is useful.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Regards,<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Jordi<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>@jordipalet<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>El 23/9/20 9:38, "Taiwo Oyewande" <a href="mailto:taiwo.oyewande88@gmail.com" target="_blank"><taiwo.oyewande88@gmail.com></a> escribió:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'> Hello PDWG,<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'> 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. <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'> _______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'> RPD mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'> <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>**********************************************<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>IPv4 is over<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Are you ready for the new Internet ?<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><a href="http://www.theipv6company.com/" target="_blank">http://www.theipv6company.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>The IPv6 Company<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'>RPD mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='margin-left:35.4pt'><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>_______________________________________________<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><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>_______________________________________________<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><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote></div></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>_______________________________________________<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><o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>_______________________________________________ RPD mailing list RPD@afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd <o:p></o:p></p></div><br>**********************************************<br>
IPv4 is over<br>
Are you ready for the new Internet ?<br>
http://www.theipv6company.com<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>
</body></html>