<html 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)"><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";}
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;}
--></style></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'>Hi Ekaterina,<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><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>The problem lies in that what for you has not been addressed, for me it has been addressed. I’ve explained over and over, and not just me, other community folks, that I don’t even know in person, or exchanged emails with them.<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><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>The objections need to be made in a rational way, if anyone (from the community, not just the authors) address them, they don’t remain. “I don’t like this” is not a valid objection. “This is not good even if it is the actual situation in other policies” is not a valid objection, unless we decide to change it for all them. So, if nothing about GDPR is a problem for the whois, then why this proposal creates a problem? Not to start discussing that the GDPR was a point brought by the chairs in their “duty” not by a community member. Not to forget that I’ve already explained that in the meeting and in the list previously, and the staff has confirmed that.<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><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Is like the previous suggestions that there is a need to define “abuse” and then after the discussion the folks that were supporting that (if I recall correctly), have changed their mind on that point. So clearly it was invalid since the beginning, but some people were not understanding correctly the policy. And this is why what we are missing in this community is having *<b>up front discussions</b>* not just the week before the PPM because then is too late to have sufficient time to explain what is being misunderstood (or even to make changes, editorial or other clarifications, etc., of course).<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><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>That’s why I suggested long time ago, and it was done at some point, to organize webinars to explain proposals way ahead to the meeting. And note that many of my comments here are not anymore related to any specific proposal, but in general to the way we cooperate and how we should improve it.<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><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Regarding my time, it is easy to understand. If I start something never mind if personal or for the community, I try my best and invest whatever time is needed: *<b>otherwise doesn’t make sense to start things and then be lazy on them</b>*. I’m not the kind of guy that give up if I believe something is right to pursue, that useless for me and for the community. I’ve even succeded to fight in courts against my country goverment, because *<b>it was the right thing to do</b>*. Of course, I give up if it is proven that I was wrong and there is not an alternative way to set the thing right. Other people prefer to drink, go to discos, sleep, or whatever. I prefer to invest my time in what it is useful for all.<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'>Myself got rejected proposals many times, but the rejection was correctly done, and then I didn’t appeal them. Instead I made a new version and sometimes succeded to get the consensus, some times withdrawn it, etc. But giving up because objections which are not rational because don’t follow the PDP, the baylaws or the RSA, and consequently are missjudged for the consensus determination, doesn’t sound like a resonable think to do.<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'>Just to give you some stats, I’ve presented I think that already more than 100 proposals among the 5 RIRs (actually I counted those because somebody from AFRINIC made me the question about 2-3 years ago). I only appealed 3 times (including this one) and believe me I was about to appeal a couple of other times but the consensus determination was in the border, so in that case, I’m happy with the chairs decision. And if I count the number of versions of each of those 100 proposals, probably it will count an average of 3-4, so it is about 400 “draft proposals” in total. I think this shows that if I appeal, is really because I think was a wrong determination. I was *<b>about</b>* to appeal this proposal in Luanda, and I decided to keep working on it because I understdood there may be lines dificult to draw with new chairs, which have no experience on determining consensus.<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'>Further to that, I’ve probably presented, also (including different versions) about other 400 or 500 documents in IETF, I never counted those. I never needed to do an appeal, probably because there we have a “more well-known consensus culture”.<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'>The PDP has an appeal process for a good reason. The chairs, as everyone, can make mistakes. The community may have the feeling that 50 voices against are good enough to drag down a proposal, but that’s not consensus. It should be measured in terms of what is valid and what is an invalid-objection. You can use different words, but it is about something justified with arguments vs non-justified, up to you what you prefer to use.<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 30/9/20 18:14, "Ekaterina Kalugina" <<a href="mailto:kay.k.prof@gmail.com">kay.k.prof@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><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Hey 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'>Let us take a step back and look at the facts. <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'>The abuse contact policy have received multiple unaddressed objections. Even if we all agreed that abuse-c has to be mandatory, the policy still has to be functional and therefore address issues such as non-compliance and enforcement. Until this is done, the consensus will not be reached. <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'>Dismissing objections as "invalid" and attacking the decisions of the co-chairs is not a way to go. In fact, this is the way to undermine the legitimacy of the entire PDP and thus threaten the integrity of all the work that had been done here. <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'>Yes, it is a shame that the policy would need to be dragged for longer, but this is not as crucial as the Resource Transfer Policy for the future of AFRINIC. Therefore, I fail to see how this argument is in any way relevant. <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'>Finally, Jordi, I cannot even begin to understand how much time and effort you put into this policy. But whether the policy is being implemented or not is up to the community, and the community did not reach consensus. Trying to undermine this decision is not playing fair. There are other authors whose policies got rejected and they accepted the community's decision with grace and understanding. I can only respectfully ask you to do the same and try your luck again next time. <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'>Warmest wishes, <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'>Ekaterina <o:p></o:p></p></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><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>On Wed, 30 Sep 2020, 17:51 Jaco Kroon <<a href="mailto:jaco@uls.co.za" target="_blank">jaco@uls.co.za</a>> wrote:<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 style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Hi Lamiaa,<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:35.4pt'>The link and all related quotes below relates to a dashboard policy.<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:35.4pt'>To the best of my knowledge this policy isn't being pushed, we're pushing the abuse contact policy, which has now been officially dragging 2 years, the longest open proposal without resolution. The dashboard is a different proposal, and I would welcome such a dashboard, whether or not it should be a matter of policy is a different discussion.<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Kind Regards,<br>Jaco<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>On 2020/09/30 17:26, Lamiaa Chnayti wrote:<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'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>Hi Jordi,<br><br>I am very disappointed with what you are doing. There are a vast amount of significant objections that clearly state this policy is a no-go.<br><br>And it is not only a no-go here, but you have also been clearly told so in RIPE as well for the same policy. Why are you not questioning the decision of the RIPE working group on the same policy and with very similar major objections?<br><br>A simple google would find you the following results (<a href="https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/2020-May/013189.html" target="_blank">https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/2020-May/013189.html</a>), and they are all coming from veterans of the RIPE community:<br><br>“Members who "care" will probably deal with issues and those who don't care won't start caring, so I'm struggling to see what value this brings”<br><br> Mr Michele Neylon<br> Blacknight Solutions<br><br><br>“Why does this need to be a policy? This is an operational implementation thing, not a strategic direction issue.”<br><br>Nick Hilliard<br><br><br>“I’m even more confused and struggling to understand how this is relevant to the AP WG. Could you please explain?<br><br>First of all, this dashboard thing is an operational service matter. Please clarify why you think it needs to be a policy issue.<br><br>Next, if you wanted to know if the NCC is considering this dashboard idea, you could simply have asked them. Or raised the matter in the NCC Services WG. Have you done either of those things? If so, what was the response?”<br><br>Jim Reid<br><br>Just to quote a few.<br><br>People have been repeatedly telling you multiple times: this is not a good policy, and you counter-arguing with the chair and saying you have addressed those concerns is not really a way to work constructively.</span> <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'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>Regards,</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='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>Lamiaa<br clear=all></span><o:p></o:p></p><div><div><div><div><div><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></div></div></div></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'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Le mer. 30 sept. 2020 à 16:05, Fernando Frediani <<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" target="_blank">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>> a écrit :<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 style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Hello Chloe, would you support the same reasoning for the Resource Transfer Policy as well ?<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 30/09/2020 11:53, Chloe Kung wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:35.4pt'>Hi Jaco, <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:35.4pt'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:35.4pt'>I don’t see why you cannot find valid objections and hence think this proposal should be in the last call. I agree with Gaby. The fact that many of us are still discussing the matter and object the proposal in all different reasons, is the prove of there is no reaching rough consensus. And so we should not rush it into last call just because some think it’s doing good or all problems have been taken care of. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:35.4pt'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:35.4pt'>Like for objection d; no proper definition of the term Abuse, there is still a need to address on it. Yes the proposal is about “building” abuse contact, but just like what Jordi has said, “ The policy only needs to state what the staff should evaluate and thus, what members should do”, if the definition of the word/ act of Abuse is not clear, how can the staff evaluate such action then? Let's say if they interpret those cases in their own different ways, it will not be fair to any of the parties nor would it be something we want I suppose. And there are high chance of having mis-interpretation too! <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:35.4pt'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:35.4pt'>Best,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:35.4pt'>Chloe <o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><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></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><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></blockquote></div></div></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>