<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>Ok, I believe I was looking at the wrong thing here, this thread
      is about a completely different policy it would seem.  My bad.  My
      apologies.<br>
      <br>
      Regarding the issue w.r.t. Board Prerogatives, what prevents abuse
      here?  As I see it directly after a PPM the board could decide to
      vary some process for whatever justification is seemingly fit, and
      this would stand until the next PPM.  They could for example take
      the policy that (currently) states that post transfer the source
      may only obtain resources again from afrinic within 12 months, and
      motivate that this must be changed because it prevents xyz from
      obtaining resources.</p>
    <p><br>
      Kind Regards,<br>
      Jaco<br>
    </p>
    <p>On 2020/10/08 21:07, Jaco Kroon wrote:<br>
    </p>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:50a02ffd-cece-4699-d88c-9ce9bc9f4367@uls.co.za">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <p>Hi Ekaterina,</p>
      <p>I believe we all agree that we want to get a transfer policy
        passed as soon as reasonably possible.  I don't think anyone is
        disputing the urgency.</p>
      <p>We are disputing the process taken, as well as the content of
        the specific policy (and I sincerely hope I'm looking at the
        right one since there are three possible ones on the site) being
        ratified now.<br>
      </p>
      <p>Nothing that affects me or my employer directly, so frankly -
        for me this is one of those "for the greater good" issues.<br>
      </p>
      <p>As Jordi, amongst others, has pointed out, a CHANGE to the
        policy in order to try and make it reciprocal has been
        introduced at the very last minute, specifically relating to
        legacy resources.  Specifically around 5.7.4.3,</p>
      <p>Currently worded as:<br>
        <br>
        Transferred IPv4 legacy resources will no longer be regarded as
        legacy resources.</p>
      <p>Proposed wording:<br>
        <br>
        Transferred legacy resources will still be regarded as legacy
        resources.</p>
      <p>Ref:  <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
          href="https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-v4-003-d3#proposal"
          moz-do-not-send="true">https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-v4-003-d3#proposal</a><br>
      </p>
      <p>Further more, as per <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
          href="https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals"
          moz-do-not-send="true">https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals</a>
        this policy is still "Under Discussion".<br>
      </p>
      <p>The above means:<br>
        <br>
        1.  Previously, when transfer of legacy resources happened,
        inside of AfriNIC, they lost legacy status, and the holders of
        those resources would then be bound by the policy manual.</p>
      <p>2.  Updated wording means that this is no longer the case, and
        legacy status is retained.</p>
      <p>This is a complete inversion.</p>
      <p>Others have stated the issues with these legacy resources and
        why we should aim to reduce them, and not keep them around
        longer than required.</p>
      <p>We can't prescribe to other RIRs.  As such, the historic
        5.7.4.3 would not be reciprocal with the inter-RIR transfer
        policies of other RIRs.  We don't want to compound the problem.</p>
      <p>As such, this only sensible solution is to allow legacy
        resources to retain legacy status as per policy of recipient
        RIR, which if AFRINIC is the recipient, or this is an
        intra-AFRINIC transfer (to which the policy previously applied)
        is that it loses status.  As such, 5.7.4.3 could be better
        worded as "Transferred IPv4 legacy resources will no longer be
        regarded as legacy resources if the recipient is an AFRINIC
        member" or "... if the recipient RIR is AFRINIC".  This
        maintains the status quo for intra-RIR transfers, and enforces
        it for inbound transfers, but says nothing for outbound.<br>
      </p>
      <p>Now we can go on to 5.7.3.1 as well, and indicate that this
        means that the *source* of the resources must comply with the
        policies of the recipient RIR ... which cannot possibly be the
        case if the source is not AFRINIC.  The source must comply with
        the policies of the source RIR, and the recipient with those of
        the recipient RIR ... but that is NOT what the proposed clause
        states.<br>
      </p>
      <p>The proposal mucks up the grammar for 5.7.3.2 without changing
        the meaning in any meaningful way in the attempt to change
        tenses.  Two fixes, leave as per the old wording or fix the
        grammar.  Both carries the same intent and meaning so this could
        be left as current, or "for<b> a</b> 12 month period after"
        (this really is a nitpick and grammatical fix).  Not that my
        grammar is as good as it should be.</p>
      <p>In 5.7.4.1 the need for an intra-RIR (AFRNIC to AFRINIC) to
        show need for resources is dropped.  This is a MAJOR policy
        change.  Again, the intent is clear, but it's not what's
        stated.  As far as I can see the extra sentence "<strong>A
          transfer from another RIR to AFRINIC requires a need-based
          evaluation.</strong>" was simply added in front of the
        policy.  Perhaps the first sentence of the original clause just
        needs to be updated, "AFRINIC must, in the case where the
        recipient is an AFRINIC member, approve the recipient's need for
        the IPv4 number resources."  As I understand this was the
        intention of the change, this says nothing of recipients in
        other RIRs, as the former wording did, but also doesn't negate
        this for intra-AFRINIC transfers.<br>
      </p>
      <p>Most of the above really are major objections in my view and
        understanding, it actually stops the policy from working, or
        reverses completely what's currently in the CPM.  In my opinion
        these are easily fixed, so why not fix it?  Or has this been
        done already and we simply just don't have visibility onto that
        which has been passed into last call and now ratified?  As far
        as I'm concerned, the state on this policy is still "Under
        Discussion" as that's what is stated on <a
          class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
          href="https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals"
          moz-do-not-send="true">https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals</a></p>
      <p>I further make note that draft 2 isn't available in any form. 
        And there is a HUGE variance between draft 1 and draft 3 (which
        has been released 21 Sept 2020).  And there is a discrepancy
        between this date on the main proposal listing (proposals) and
        the one on <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
          href="https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-v4-003-d3"
          moz-do-not-send="true">https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-v4-003-d3</a></p>
      <p>So let's take a step back here, some are saying any objections
        after 2nd of October should be ignored.  So let's step two weeks
        back, that takes us to 18 September.  So you're telling me a
        policy was sent to last call before it was even released?</p>
      <p>This does not and cannot possibly be right.<br>
      </p>
      <p>There is no staff impact assessment available either.</p>
      <p>I do not see how this could have gone to last call, never mind
        ratification.<br>
      </p>
      <p>Kind Regards,<br>
        Jaco<br>
      </p>
      <p>On 2020/10/08 19:52, Ekaterina Kalugina wrote:</p>
      <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAHS7WUC1P=X=3O0DLPtCt6812pxj+xLOQ59vNW6gRppKKAemwg@mail.gmail.com">
        <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
          charset=UTF-8">
        <div dir="auto">Dear all,
          <div dir="auto"><br>
            <div dir="auto">The objections to this policy were not major
              objections. Therefore, the chairs performed the
              administrative function within the scope of the CPM.</div>
            <div dir="auto"><br>
            </div>
            <div dir="auto">In addition, none of us are 'fans' of the
              proposed policy. It's just some of our colleges including
              myself see a great value and need in passing this policy
              as soon as possible.</div>
            <div dir="auto"><br>
            </div>
            <div dir="auto">Let us not try to downplay the danger of the
              situation. Stability of the region must be preserved. Not
              having an inter RIR policy on time could be detrimental.
              Especially in these unprecedented times we must take every
              step. </div>
            <div dir="auto"><br>
            </div>
            <div dir="auto">The CPM is there to ensure the best future
              for the region. This should be our main focus. And it
              seems to me that between all these squabbles and passive
              aggressive statements many of you lost sight of what is
              actually important here. </div>
            <div dir="auto"><br>
            </div>
            <div dir="auto">In my view, it's important to create a safe
              net instead of raging over minor technicalities of the
              PDP. </div>
            <div dir="auto"><br>
            </div>
            <div dir="auto">I think it makes more sense to advocate for
              preventative care rather than suffer the consequences of
              the terribly uncertain future. Wouldn't you agree? </div>
            <div dir="auto"><br>
            </div>
            <div dir="auto">Best, </div>
            <div dir="auto"><br>
            </div>
            <div dir="auto">Ekaterina </div>
          </div>
        </div>
        <br>
        <div class="gmail_quote">
          <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, 8 Oct 2020, 19:11
            Gregoire EHOUMI via RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
              moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>> wrote:<br>
          </div>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
            .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
            <div dir="auto">I agree with Jordi on this. 
              <div dir="auto"><br>
              </div>
              <div dir="auto">This is a total mess between the policy
                proposal versions and the discussions. </div>
              <div dir="auto"><br>
              </div>
              <div dir="auto">I can see that the co-chairs did not take
                into account outstanding objections.<br>
                <br>
                Therefore, I urge co-chairs to reconsider this
                decision. </div>
              <div dir="auto"><br>
                <div data-smartmail="gmail_signature" dir="auto">--<br>
                  Gregoire </div>
              </div>
            </div>
            <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
              <div class="gmail_quote">On Oct. 8, 2020 3:42 a.m., JORDI
                PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <<a
                  href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
                  rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>>
                wrote:<br type="attribution">
                <blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px
                  #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
                  <div style="word-wrap:break-word">
                    <div>
                      <p><span style="font-size:12pt">Hi Moses, all,</span></p>
                      <p><span style="font-size:12pt"> </span></p>
                      <p><span style="font-size:12pt">I feel that there
                          is a fundamental mistake here and I beg you to
                          reconsider it.</span></p>
                      <p><span style="font-size:12pt"> </span></p>
                      <p><span style="font-size:12pt">You've not waited
                          for the staff confirmation about the
                          reciprocity of the Inter-RIR transfers. What
                          happens if now the staff comes back and
                          confirms that we can’t decide in our policy
                          what do to in other regions, so there is no
                          reciprocity and so, we can’t implement this
                          policy?</span></p>
                      <p><span style="font-size:12pt"> </span></p>
                      <p><span style="font-size:12pt">Accordingly, I
                          strongly suggest that you change your mind,
                          following section 3.5 of the PDP: “A person
                          who disagrees with the actions taken by the
                          Chair(s) shall discuss the matter with the
                          PDWG Chair(s) or with the PDWG”.</span></p>
                      <p><span style="font-size:12pt"> </span></p>
                      <p><span style="font-size:12pt">The reasons for
                          this are:</span></p>
                      <ol style="margin-top:0cm" type="1" start="1">
                        <li style="margin-left:0cm"><span
                            style="font-size:12pt">The only valid
                            proposal version is the one that is
                            published at the web site and then announced
                            to the list. The authors did changes several
                            times, that aren’t there. As we are
                            discussing version 2, we should have a
                            version 2.x to show those.</span></li>
                        <li style="margin-left:0cm"><span
                            style="font-size:12pt">The staff must
                            confirm the reciprocity of the last 2.x
                            version in the list. As indicated in 3.4.3,
                            you can extend the last-call to ensure that
                            this is matched.</span></li>
                        <li style="margin-left:0cm"><span
                            style="font-size:12pt">This and other
                            aspects, have been indicated several times
                            by myself and others during the last-call.
                            Those are valid-objections that remain
                            unresolved and if you extend the last-call
                            and agree with the latest changes from the
                            authors, then could make sense, otherwise,
                            it is impossible that you can declare the
                            last-call and still “consensus”.</span></li>
                      </ol>
                      <p><span style="font-size:12pt"> </span></p>
                      <p><span style="font-size:12pt"> </span></p>
                      <div>
                        <p><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Regards,</span></p>
                        <p style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span
                            style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Jordi</span></p>
                        <p style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span
                            style="font-size:12pt;color:black">@jordipalet</span></p>
                        <p style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span
                            style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> </span></p>
                      </div>
                      <p><span style="font-size:12pt"> </span></p>
                      <p><span style="font-size:12pt"> </span></p>
                      <div>
                        <div>
                          <p style="margin-left:35.4pt">El 8/10/20 1:37,
                            "Moses Serugo" <<a
                              href="mailto:moses.serugo@gmail.com"
                              target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"
                              moz-do-not-send="true">moses.serugo@gmail.com</a>>
                            escribió:</p>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                      <div>
                        <p style="margin-left:35.4pt"> </p>
                      </div>
                      <div>
                        <div>
                          <p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
                              style="color:#1f4e79">Hello PDWG members,</span><span
                              style="color:#000099"></span></p>
                          <p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
                              style="color:#1f4e79"> </span><span
                              style="color:#000099"></span></p>
                          <p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
                              style="color:#1f4e79">Following the last
                              online PPM held on 16<sup>th</sup>-17<sup>th</sup>
                              September 2020. Last call was announced on
                              21<sup>st</sup> September 2020 for the
                              following policy proposals.</span><span
                              style="color:#000099"></span></p>
                          <p style="margin-left:71.4pt"><span
                              style="font-size:10pt;font-family:'symbol';color:#000099">·<span
                                style="font:7pt 'times new roman'">        
                              </span></span><span
                              style="font-size:12pt;font-family:'trebuchet
                              ms',sans-serif;color:#1f4e79">Board
                              Prerogatives on the PDP</span><span
                              style="font-size:12pt;font-family:'trebuchet
                              ms',sans-serif;color:#000099"></span></p>
                          <p style="margin-left:71.4pt"><span
                              style="font-size:10pt;font-family:'symbol';color:#000099">·<span
                                style="font:7pt 'times new roman'">        
                              </span></span><span
                              style="font-family:'trebuchet
                              ms',sans-serif;color:#1f4e79">Resource
                              Transfer Policy</span><span
                              style="font-size:12pt;font-family:'trebuchet
                              ms',sans-serif;color:#000099"></span></p>
                          <p
                            style="margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:15pt;margin-left:35.4pt"><span
                              style="color:#1f4e79">This is to further
                              announce that the  last call period for
                              the above proposals has ended, based on
                              feedback received from the community and
                              the editorial changes made by authors to
                              address community concerns, the consensus
                              decision from AFRINIC32 is still
                              maintained.<br>
                              <br>
                              Co-Chairs will now send a report to the
                              Board recommending ratification of the two
                              above proposals in line with CPM 3.0.<br>
                              <br>
                              Regards,<br>
                              <br>
                              Co-Chairs  </span><span
                              style="color:#000099"></span></p>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                      <p style="margin-left:35.4pt">_______________________________________________
                        RPD mailing list <a
                          href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
                          rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
                        <a
                          href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
                          target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"
                          moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
                      </p>
                    </div>
                    <br>
                    **********************************************<br>
                    IPv4 is over<br>
                    Are you ready for the new Internet ?<br>
                    <a href="http://www.theipv6company.com"
                      target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"
                      moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.theipv6company.com</a><br>
                    The IPv6 Company<br>
                    <br>
                    This electronic message contains information which
                    may be privileged or confidential. The information
                    is intended to be for the exclusive use of the
                    individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty
                    authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use
                    of the contents of this information, even if
                    partially, including attached files, is strictly
                    prohibited and will be considered a criminal
                    offense. If you are not the intended recipient be
                    aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or
                    use of the contents of this information, even if
                    partially, including attached files, is strictly
                    prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense,
                    so you must reply to the original sender to inform
                    about this communication and delete it.<br>
                    <br>
                  </div>
                </blockquote>
              </div>
              <br>
            </div>
            _______________________________________________<br>
            RPD mailing list<br>
            <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
              rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
            <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
              rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
              moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <br>
        <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
        <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
</pre>
      </blockquote>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>