<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;}
/* 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;}
span.EstiloCorreo18
{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;-webkit-nbsp-mode: space;line-break:after-white-space'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>So … what we are basically concluding here is that the *<b>creation</b>* of AFRINIC was against the terms stated in ICP-2.<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 invalidates totally the AFRINIC mandate, which is really bad.<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'>You’re probably right that it will be dificult for the community to enforce that in a long civil proccess, however may be the other RIRs and ICANN have something to say. It was a clear mistake and should be corrected.<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'>Ideally the Board should ask the membership if they want to correct that, that’s *<b>one choice</b>* to resolve the problem.<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'>In any case I still believe that the legal counsel is wrong because what the proposal is doing is actually *<b>accepting explicitly</b>* what the bylaws already have and this the *<b>seconds choice</b>*.<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 Board will avoid an unnecesary modification of the bylaws, but the community has expressed their willigness to accept that.<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'>I can’t see how that can be understood, by any means, as enchroaching them.<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'>So for example, you have a rule in your company that enforces to save energy. And the shareholders and the employees get together and write a rule for that as well, consistent with your own rule. You can say it is redundant in this example, but in the case of the AFRINIC proposal, even if it may seen as redundant it is a matter of correcting something that is missing, because the managemente of the PDP belongs to the Community, not the membership.<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 bylaws aren’t providing the power to the communidy to develop the PDP, the policies, etc., because it is already the community duty, not the board one.<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 4/8/21 2:38, "Owen DeLong" <<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com">owen@delong.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><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 Aug 1, 2021, at 23:47 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net">rpd@afrinic.net</a>> wrote:<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 lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt'>I’ve discussed *<b>many</b>* times that this right should be provided by the community and never by the bylaws, but *<b>right now</b>* is in the bylaws, we like it or not.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>Indeed, it is the bylaw change of 2012 that even granted the community any control over policy at all.<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 current version and links to all previous versions (2007, 2012, 2016) are available here:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><a href="https://afrinic.net/bylaws">https://afrinic.net/bylaws</a><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'>If one reads the 2007 version, you will see that the policy process is granted entirely to the board without any structured process for the community. Thus, it is interesting that AFRINIC was somehow able to pass muster for ICP-2 in April, 2005. I have to wonder where the pre-2005 bylaws are and what policy development process existed at that time given the text in the 2007 bylaws and the changes implemented in the 2012 bylaws which basically created the PDWG and the PDP.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt'>The policy that the board didn’t want to ratify and I’m still waiting for a response to my email, was resolving that.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>I think you’ve probably gotten about all the response you will get. Their legal advisor told them it was out of scope for the PDP and overreached policy into bylaw territory (paraphrased).<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'>Personally, I think he was correct (a rarity).<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'>If you want to make most of the changes proposed in that policy proposal, you should resubmit them as a motion to a members meeting and amend the bylaws accordingly.<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'>That will have the effect you want, and short of refusing to put it on the agenda of an AGMM, the board cannot avoid implementation if you are able to get an affirmative vote to pass the motion.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span><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 lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt'>The community already decided that they *<b>want that</b>* when this policy reached consensus.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>But it’s a bylaw matter, not a policy matter, so it isn’t the community that gets to decide. It needs to amend the bylaws and those are clearly under the control of the membership. I you really think this is a good idea, then submit a motion to amend the bylaws.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt'>The Board has the tool on his hands if they want to reconsider the ratification!</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'>They really don’t. The board does not have the power to amend the bylaws and contrary to what is often stated on this list, in a contest between the CPM and the bylaws in terms of which document staff and management must follow, the bylaws are the clear winner because the legal consequences of violating the CPM are most likely limited to civil damages while violating the corporate constitution can result in criminal and civil liability (as I understand it in most jurisdictions, IANAL, MU may be different).<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'>Owen<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:35.4pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div></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>