<div dir="ltr">Greetings, <div><br></div><div>Please switch me to a daily digest. </div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Onica</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Jul 20, 2026 at 8:51 AM <<a href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Send RPD mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:rpd-owner@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd-owner@afrinic.net</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of RPD digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. Re: RPD Digest, Vol 222, Issue 76 (Frank Habicht)<br>
2. Re: [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical Names<br>
for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02) (Frank Habicht)<br>
3. Re: [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal - Hierarchical Names<br>
for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02) (Frank Habicht)<br>
4. Re: [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal - Hierarchical Names<br>
for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02) (Thandeka Mseleku)<br>
5. Re: [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical Names<br>
for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02) (Daniel Schroder)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 07:25:52 +0300<br>
From: Frank Habicht <<a href="mailto:geier@geier.ne.tz" target="_blank">geier@geier.ne.tz</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [rpd] RPD Digest, Vol 222, Issue 76<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:a8fbf2f5-680a-4fe1-893e-e805b08bbcb3@geier.ne.tz" target="_blank">a8fbf2f5-680a-4fe1-893e-e805b08bbcb3@geier.ne.tz</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed<br>
<br>
Hi<br>
<br>
On 7/20/2026 1:17 AM, Fundiswa Nadia Maseko wrote:<br>
> I disagree with your conclusion that opponents have presented no <br>
> technical arguments. <br>
Please name one.<br>
<br>
Frank<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 07:36:00 +0300<br>
From: Frank Habicht <<a href="mailto:geier@geier.ne.tz" target="_blank">geier@geier.ne.tz</a>><br>
To: Thulisile Mazomba <<a href="mailto:219280444@mycput.ac.za" target="_blank">219280444@mycput.ac.za</a>>, "<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
Cc: "<a href="mailto:rpd-owner@afrinic.ne" target="_blank">rpd-owner@afrinic.ne</a>" <<a href="mailto:rpd-owner@afrinic.ne" target="_blank">rpd-owner@afrinic.ne</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical<br>
Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:8b2ddf81-edd0-4c6a-97c3-46be5634ea04@geier.ne.tz" target="_blank">8b2ddf81-edd0-4c6a-97c3-46be5634ea04@geier.ne.tz</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed<br>
<br>
Hi,<br>
<br>
On 7/19/2026 11:29 PM, Thulisile Mazomba wrote:<br>
> <br>
> Hi Frank,<br>
> <br>
> You appear to be treating your disagreement with an objection as proof <br>
> that no technical objection exists.<br>
> <br>
> The proposal prevents one naming collision. It does not establish the <br>
> correctness of the routing data attached to that name,<br>
<br>
The proposal does not fix *all* problems. and it doesn't claim to do so.<br>
It creates an improvement.<br>
I don't agree that it is ok to object just because this proposal does <br>
not fix *all* problems.<br>
<br>
Do you agree it provides improvements?<br>
<br>
> nor prove that <br>
> mandatory registry control is the only proportionate remedy.<br>
<br>
it's not intended to prove that.<br>
<br>
> <br>
> Those are technical and policy questions. Declaring them invalid does <br>
> not resolve them.<br>
They are not good reasons against the proposal.<br>
<br>
But some people maybe want to be against the proposal first and then are <br>
looking for "questions".<br>
<br>
Frank<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 3<br>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 07:58:22 +0300<br>
From: Frank Habicht <<a href="mailto:geier@geier.ne.tz" target="_blank">geier@geier.ne.tz</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal - Hierarchical<br>
Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:3e091d61-af57-4543-bebf-402a7fbc937f@geier.ne.tz" target="_blank">3e091d61-af57-4543-bebf-402a7fbc937f@geier.ne.tz</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed<br>
<br>
Hi,<br>
<br>
inline...<br>
<br>
On 7/19/2026 9:38 PM, Fundiswa Nadia Maseko wrote:<br>
> Dear Hendrik,<br>
> <br>
> Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions.<br>
> <br>
> I think we actually agree on one important point: hierarchical naming <br>
> authenticates who creates the object,<br>
<br>
can we also agree that this is a good thing?<br>
<br>
> but it does not guarantee that the <br>
> contents of the object are accurate.<br>
<br>
I agree with that.<br>
Also, please note: noone claimed it does that.<br>
This proposal is not the perfect solution which guarantees accuracy.<br>
There are also many other problems this proposal does not solve.....<br>
<br>
> That was the distinction I was <br>
> trying to make.<br>
<br>
So the proposal is an improvement, right?<br>
So should we adopt it?<br>
<br>
Since AfriNIC does operate an IRR, do we want AfriNIC to do that in the <br>
best possible way?<br>
<br>
<br>
> Where we still differ is on whether that justifies making the naming <br>
> convention mandatory.<br>
<br>
I tried to explain with the AS-GOOGLE example - if we don't make it <br>
mandatory, collisions may be created. Actually by anyone in the world.<br>
<br>
> I understand your position that this is the <br>
> narrowest solution available, but I'm not yet convinced that less <br>
> restrictive alternatives have been ruled out.<br>
<br>
I don't think it's possible to prove to you that there are no less <br>
restrictive alternatives. But if there are, I think it's possible for <br>
you to show us.<br>
<br>
> I still think that point <br>
> deserves more discussion.<br>
<br>
And we should start to clarify where the "burden of proof" is ;-)<br>
<br>
> I also don't believe that the fact that other RIRs have adopted the same <br>
> approach automatically means AFRINIC must do so. It's useful context, <br>
> but I don't think it replaces the need to show why this is necessary for <br>
> our own policy process.<br>
<br>
About the necessity:<br>
Can we agree that collisions happen, that hey are bad, that they have <br>
let to operational problems?<br>
<br>
> I'm not trying to oppose operational improvements. I'm simply asking <br>
> whether a mandatory policy is the only way to achieve the intended <br>
> outcome.<br>
<br>
If we can find a better way, we can use it.<br>
If we can't find a better way, I think we should use this proposal.<br>
Isn't this how this choice should work?<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Frank<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 4<br>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 08:06:34 +0200<br>
From: Thandeka Mseleku <<a href="mailto:mselekuthandeka80@gmail.com" target="_blank">mselekuthandeka80@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
Cc: <a href="mailto:rpd-owner@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd-owner@afrinic.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal - Hierarchical<br>
Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CA+mVb0=<a href="mailto:S0D4RO7rbS-CVSP0_3wntWb0H5AXTf4tqHkV-s974fA@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">S0D4RO7rbS-CVSP0_3wntWb0H5AXTf4tqHkV-s974fA@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Dear colleagues,<br>
<br>
The discussion is now being diverted from the proposal into speculation<br>
about writing style, drafting tools, and who may have assisted whom.<br>
<br>
That is not a sound basis for policy assessment.<br>
<br>
An LLM?s opinion about whether a message resembles another message is not<br>
evidence of authorship, coordination, or astroturfing. It is merely another<br>
generated interpretation. Feeding text into Claude and quoting a<br>
probability back to the list does not establish who wrote the text, who<br>
agrees with it, or whether the argument is valid.<br>
<br>
Frank suggests that contributions should be disregarded because they refer<br>
to the burden of proof even though the proposal contains a problem<br>
statement. That is a misunderstanding. A problem statement identifies a<br>
concern. It does not automatically prove that the proposed remedy is<br>
necessary, sufficient, proportionate, or the least restrictive available<br>
response.<br>
<br>
Those are different questions.<br>
<br>
The proposal may accurately describe risks associated with flat AS-SET<br>
names. Objectors are still entitled to ask whether mandatory hierarchical<br>
naming addresses the full problem, whether the benefit has been measured,<br>
whether residual risks remain, and whether central enforcement is justified.<br>
<br>
The repeated focus on familiar wording also proves very little.<br>
Participants reading the same thread may naturally respond to the same<br>
claims. People may agree with one another. They may adopt terminology<br>
already introduced in the discussion. Similarity of argument is not proof<br>
of common authorship, just as familiarity of names is not proof of<br>
correctness.<br>
<br>
The proper response to repeated objections is simple: identify the common<br>
substantive issue and answer it once, clearly and completely. If the<br>
objection is that hierarchical naming authenticates the creator of an<br>
object but does not validate its contents, then address that distinction.<br>
If the objection concerns the scope of mandatory registry authority,<br>
explain why compulsion is indispensable. If the objection concerns<br>
proportionality, provide the evidence.<br>
<br>
Trying to disqualify the speakers does not answer the argument.<br>
<br>
Participation in the PDWG should not depend on being a recognised operator,<br>
representing an ASN, writing in an informal style, or avoiding editorial<br>
assistance. Participants contribute evidence, criticism, experience, and<br>
warning. They do not need permission from an established procedural class<br>
before their concerns may be considered.<br>
<br>
Nor should the PDP confuse process with mandate. A proposal does not become<br>
technically necessary merely because it has supporters, a problem<br>
statement, or precedent elsewhere. The process must still test the rule<br>
against operational reality.<br>
<br>
The registry should remain a narrow coordination layer. It may protect<br>
uniqueness, maintain accurate records, and support routing-related<br>
services. It should not acquire broader authority simply because objections<br>
are inconvenient or because regular participants prefer a particular<br>
convention.<br>
<br>
I therefore ask that the discussion return to the policy itself.<br>
<br>
The questions remain:<br>
<br>
What exact failure does the proposal prevent?<br>
<br>
What evidence shows the scale of that failure?<br>
<br>
What risks remain after hierarchical naming is imposed?<br>
<br>
Why are less restrictive technical mechanisms insufficient?<br>
<br>
How will success be measured?<br>
<br>
Until those questions are answered, dismissing objections because of<br>
writing style is not consensus-building. It is avoidance.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Thandeka<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260720/8854dcc4/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260720/8854dcc4/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 5<br>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 08:49:53 +0200<br>
From: Daniel Schroder <<a href="mailto:daniel.schroder@gmail.com" target="_blank">daniel.schroder@gmail.com</a>><br>
Cc: <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical<br>
Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAMvWrAvBC-szp2ueFznaD9QMCsQ=<a href="mailto:4qZNniduoG473soQVWdKBw@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">4qZNniduoG473soQVWdKBw@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Simple: The dog wanted a bone as usual.<br>
AI: As is customary, the canine harbored an insatiable desire for an<br>
osseous structure.<br>
<br>
Simple: Tom ordered pizza.<br>
AI: Thomas commissioned the preparation of an Italian flatbread adorned<br>
with melted cheese and savory toppings.<br>
<br>
Simple: We need one more document to complete your file.<br>
AI: Additional documentation is an absolute prerequisite to finalize your<br>
comprehensive dossier.<br>
<br>
If everyones is looking at their watches during a meeting, you missing the<br>
point which is getting to the point.<br>
<br>
Having language models influence input into policy changes from<br>
participants who rely on those LLMs for the simple objective of being heard<br>
or taken seriously is going to dissuade actual progress because there are<br>
other matters to attend to with policy being shifted to the backbench and<br>
your efforts effectively ignored, or your pearls lost in the mud. -daniel<br>
<br>
<br>
On Sun, Jul 19, 2026 at 9:38?PM Gugu Dhlamini <<a href="mailto:gugudhlamini343@gmail.com" target="_blank">gugudhlamini343@gmail.com</a>><br>
wrote:<br>
<br>
> Hi Saul,<br>
><br>
> Yes, the message was sent twice. That is a posting mistake, not a policy<br>
> argument.<br>
><br>
> Focusing on duplicate delivery while ignoring the substance is exactly how<br>
> process starts replacing discussion. Please address the objection itself<br>
> rather than using a technical error as a reason to dismiss participation.<br>
><br>
> Regards,<br>
> Gugu<br>
><br>
> On Sun, 19 Jul 2026, 9:29 pm Fundiswa Nadia Maseko <<br>
> <a href="mailto:fundiswanadia2@gmail.com" target="_blank">fundiswanadia2@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Thank you for pointing that out.<br>
>><br>
>> The two emails were intended for different purposes. The first was a<br>
>> direct response to Hendrik's points, while the second was addressed to the<br>
>> broader discussion, including your comments and the wider issue that had<br>
>> developed on the mailing list.<br>
>><br>
>> I understand they were sent close together, which may have made them<br>
>> appear to be duplicates, but they were intended as separate responses.<br>
>><br>
>> Kind regards,<br>
>><br>
>> Fundiswa Nadia Maseko<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Sun, 19 Jul 2026, 21:20 Saul Stein, <<a href="mailto:saul@enetworks.co.za" target="_blank">saul@enetworks.co.za</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>> Hi<br>
>>><br>
>>> you have now posted the email twice 7 minutes apart?<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> *From:* Fundiswa Nadia Maseko <<a href="mailto:fundiswanadia2@gmail.com" target="_blank">fundiswanadia2@gmail.com</a>><br>
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, 19 July 2026 20:46<br>
>>> *To:* <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical<br>
>>> Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Dear Hendrik, Saul, and colleagues,<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Thank you for your responses.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> I would also like to address the recurring comments about AI-generated<br>
>>> contributions.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Whether someone uses AI to improve grammar, structure, or clarity does<br>
>>> not, in itself, determine whether their arguments are valid. AI only works<br>
>>> with the information and instructions provided by the person using it. Many<br>
>>> people use it as a writing assistant to communicate their ideas more<br>
>>> clearly, just as others may ask a colleague to proofread or edit a draft<br>
>>> before sending it.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> For that reason, I do not believe the discussion should focus on how a<br>
>>> message was written, but rather on whether the technical reasoning is<br>
>>> correct or incorrect.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> With regard to the proposal itself, I appreciate Hendrik's direct<br>
>>> answers. However, simply answering "yes" or "no" does not, by itself,<br>
>>> explain the technical reasoning behind those conclusions. It would be<br>
>>> helpful to understand why the proposal is considered the least restrictive<br>
>>> solution and how the identified operational benefits outweigh the<br>
>>> additional policy requirements. That explanation would assist everyone in<br>
>>> evaluating the proposal on its technical merits.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> I believe the PDWG is strongest when differing views are examined<br>
>>> through technical discussion supported by evidence, rather than assumptions<br>
>>> about who wrote a message or what tools they may have used.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Kind regards,<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Fundiswa Nadia Maseko<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> On Sun, 19 Jul 2026, 20:34 , <<a href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> Send RPD mailing list submissions to<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
>>><br>
>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
>>> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a><br>
>>><br>
>>> You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:rpd-owner@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd-owner@afrinic.net</a><br>
>>><br>
>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
>>> than "Re: Contents of RPD digest..."<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Today's Topics:<br>
>>><br>
>>> 1. Re: [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical Names<br>
>>> for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02) (Hendrik Visage)<br>
>>> 2. Re: [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical Names<br>
>>> for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02) (Saul Stein)<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
>>><br>
>>> Message: 1<br>
>>> Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2026 20:25:00 +0200<br>
>>> From: Hendrik Visage <<a href="mailto:hvisage@hevis.co.za" target="_blank">hvisage@hevis.co.za</a>><br>
>>> To: Fundiswa Nadia Maseko <<a href="mailto:fundiswanadia2@gmail.com" target="_blank">fundiswanadia2@gmail.com</a>><br>
>>> Cc: <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
>>> Subject: Re: [rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical<br>
>>> Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)<br>
>>> Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:24327C8E-E411-4D2F-BE55-F250691CD720@hevis.co.za" target="_blank">24327C8E-E411-4D2F-BE55-F250691CD720@hevis.co.za</a>><br>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"<br>
>>><br>
>>> Dear Fundiswa,<br>
>>><br>
>>> ?Has the proposal demonstrated mandatory naming is the least<br>
>>> restrictive solution?" ? Yes,<br>
>>><br>
>>> "Do you disagree that hierarchical naming authenticates object creation<br>
>>> rather than membership accuracy?" ? No.<br>
>>><br>
>>> These are the specific answers requested.<br>
>>> If you still oppose this proposal, we ask that you engage these answers<br>
>>> first ? in particular the deployment-coordination asymmetry raised ?<br>
>>> instead of repeating the original objections without technical<br>
>>> substances<br>
>>><br>
>>> ---<br>
>>> Hendrik Visage<br>
>>> Director/Owner<br>
>>> HeViS.Co Systems t/a Envisage Cloud Solutions<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:hvisage@hevis.co.za" target="_blank">hvisage@hevis.co.za</a><br>
>>> GSM/SMS/Signal: +27-84-612-5345<br>
>>> InstantMessenger: <a href="https://t.me/hvisage" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://t.me/hvisage</a><br>
>>><br>
>>> On 19 Jul 2026, at 19:54, Fundiswa Nadia Maseko wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> > Dear Ben,<br>
>>> ><br>
>>> > Thank you for your response.<br>
>>> ><br>
>>> > Respectfully, I believe it is more productive to address the arguments<br>
>>> > themselves than to make assumptions about the people presenting them<br>
>>> > or the<br>
>>> > tools they may have used.<br>
>>> ><br>
>>> > If you believe the objections are technically incorrect, I would<br>
>>> > appreciate<br>
>>> > it if you could identify which specific points you disagree with. For<br>
>>> > example, do you disagree that hierarchical naming authenticates object<br>
>>> > creation rather than the accuracy of object membership? Or do you<br>
>>> > believe<br>
>>> > the proposal has demonstrated that mandatory naming is the least<br>
>>> > restrictive solution available?<br>
>>> ><br>
>>> > Those are technical questions that can be examined and debated.<br>
>>> > Dismissing<br>
>>> > opposing views as "AI bots" does not, on its own, explain why the<br>
>>> > arguments<br>
>>> > are wrong.<br>
>>> > I believe the PDWG benefits most when participants engage with the<br>
>>> > substance of each other's reasoning, regardless of how a contribution<br>
>>> > was<br>
>>> > drafted.<br>
>>> ><br>
>>> ><br>
>>> > Kind regards,<br>
>>> > Fundiswa Nadia Maseko<br>
>>> ><br>
>>> > On Sun, 19 Jul 2026, 19:13 Ben Roberts - AfriNIC,<br>
>>> > <<a href="mailto:ben.roberts@afrinic.net" target="_blank">ben.roberts@afrinic.net</a>><br>
>>> > wrote:<br>
>>> ><br>
>>> >> Fundiswa,<br>
>>> >> But the AI bots opposing the AS-SET policy aren?t making technical<br>
>>> >> arguments. They are just regurgitating and re-using the same script.<br>
>>> >> None<br>
>>> >> of them seem to know or care what an AS-SET is, or what network<br>
>>> >> owners use<br>
>>> >> them for.<br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >> Cheers,<br>
>>> >> Ben<br>
>>> >> Sent from my iPhone<br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >> On 19 Jul 2026, at 17:56, Fundiswa Nadia Maseko<br>
>>> >> <<a href="mailto:fundiswanadia2@gmail.com" target="_blank">fundiswanadia2@gmail.com</a>><br>
>>> >> wrote:<br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >> ?<br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >> *Dear PDWG,*<br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >> I have been following this discussion with interest, and I would like<br>
>>> >> to<br>
>>> >> express my concern about the direction it has taken.<br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >> The Policy Development Process should evaluate technical arguments on<br>
>>> >> their merits. Whether a participant drafted a message unaided,<br>
>>> >> received<br>
>>> >> editorial assistance, or used modern writing tools does not determine<br>
>>> >> whether the reasoning is sound. Speculating about authorship instead<br>
>>> >> of<br>
>>> >> addressing the substance risks distracting the Working Group from the<br>
>>> >> policy questions before it.<br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >> I am also concerned by suggestions that contributions should be<br>
>>> >> disregarded simply because of assumptions about how they were<br>
>>> >> written. If<br>
>>> >> there are factual or technical errors, they should be identified and<br>
>>> >> discussed. That is how consensus is strengthened.<br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >> The questions raised by several participants remain legitimate<br>
>>> >> subjects<br>
>>> >> for technical debate: whether the proposal has demonstrated<br>
>>> >> operational<br>
>>> >> necessity, whether the proposed intervention is proportionate, and<br>
>>> >> whether<br>
>>> >> less restrictive alternatives have been adequately considered.<br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >> I therefore encourage all participants to continue engaging with the<br>
>>> >> substance of the proposal while maintaining the respectful and<br>
>>> >> professional<br>
>>> >> standards expected within the PDWG.<br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >> Kind regards,<br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >> Fundiswa Nadia Maseko<br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> >> RPD mailing list<br>
>>> >> <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
>>> >> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
>>> >><br>
>>> >><br>
>>><br>
>>> > _______________________________________________<br>
>>> > RPD mailing list<br>
>>> > <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
>>> > <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
>>> -------------- next part --------------<br>
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
>>> URL: <<br>
>>> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260719/3805216e/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260719/3805216e/attachment-0001.html</a><br>
>>> ><br>
>>><br>
>>> ------------------------------<br>
>>><br>
>>> Message: 2<br>
>>> Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2026 18:34:04 +0000<br>
>>> From: Saul Stein <<a href="mailto:saul@enetworks.co.za" target="_blank">saul@enetworks.co.za</a>><br>
>>> To: Hendrik Visage <<a href="mailto:hvisage@hevis.co.za" target="_blank">hvisage@hevis.co.za</a>>, Fundiswa Nadia Maseko<br>
>>> <<a href="mailto:fundiswanadia2@gmail.com" target="_blank">fundiswanadia2@gmail.com</a>><br>
>>> Cc: "<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a>" <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
>>> Subject: Re: [rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical<br>
>>> Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)<br>
>>> Message-ID:<br>
>>> <<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:JNAP275MB125812327DC4FFF2404C216E8EC42@JNAP275MB1258.ZAFP275.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM" target="_blank">JNAP275MB125812327DC4FFF2404C216E8EC42@JNAP275MB1258.ZAFP275.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM</a><br>
>>> ><br>
>>><br>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
>>><br>
>>> Dear all,<br>
>>> Well, I have just finished my popcorn? sadly there wasn?t enough to read<br>
>>> the bombardment of emails, so I didn?t.<br>
>>><br>
>>> What I did see though, was a number of non-original / cvopy and paste<br>
>>> objections. Not only that, but more importantly, they do not raise any<br>
>>> valid concerns about the proposal that has reached final call.<br>
>>><br>
>>> So with that in mind, I fully support this proposal.<br>
>>><br>
>>> I?d have to be part of a community group where you have to have a valid<br>
>>> NIC to post?<br>
>>><br>
>>> Regards<br>
>>> Saul<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> From: Hendrik Visage via RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
>>> Sent: Sunday, 19 July 2026 20:25<br>
>>> To: Fundiswa Nadia Maseko <<a href="mailto:fundiswanadia2@gmail.com" target="_blank">fundiswanadia2@gmail.com</a>><br>
>>> Cc: <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
>>> Subject: Re: [rpd] [Last Call] Draft Policy Proposal ? Hierarchical<br>
>>> Names for New AS-SETs (AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02)<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Dear Fundiswa,<br>
>>><br>
>>> ?Has the proposal demonstrated mandatory naming is the least restrictive<br>
>>> solution?" ? Yes,<br>
>>><br>
>>> "Do you disagree that hierarchical naming authenticates object creation<br>
>>> rather than membership accuracy?" ? No.<br>
>>><br>
>>> These are the specific answers requested.<br>
>>> If you still oppose this proposal, we ask that you engage these answers<br>
>>> first ? in particular the deployment-coordination asymmetry raised ?<br>
>>> instead of repeating the original objections without technical substances<br>
>>><br>
>>> ________________________________<br>
>>><br>
>>> Hendrik Visage<br>
>>> Director/Owner<br>
>>> HeViS.Co<<a href="http://HeViS.Co" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://HeViS.Co</a>> Systems t/a Envisage Cloud Solutions<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:hvisage@hevis.co.za" target="_blank">hvisage@hevis.co.za</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:hvisage@hevis.co.za" target="_blank">hvisage@hevis.co.za</a>><br>
>>> GSM/SMS/Signal: +27-84-612-5345<br>
>>> InstantMessenger: <a href="https://t.me/hvisage" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://t.me/hvisage</a><<a href="https://t.me/hvisage" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://t.me/hvisage</a>><br>
>>><br>
>>> On 19 Jul 2026, at 19:54, Fundiswa Nadia Maseko wrote:<br>
>>> Dear Ben,<br>
>>><br>
>>> Thank you for your response.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Respectfully, I believe it is more productive to address the arguments<br>
>>> themselves than to make assumptions about the people presenting them or the<br>
>>> tools they may have used.<br>
>>><br>
>>> If you believe the objections are technically incorrect, I would<br>
>>> appreciate it if you could identify which specific points you disagree<br>
>>> with. For example, do you disagree that hierarchical naming authenticates<br>
>>> object creation rather than the accuracy of object membership? Or do you<br>
>>> believe the proposal has demonstrated that mandatory naming is the least<br>
>>> restrictive solution available?<br>
>>><br>
>>> Those are technical questions that can be examined and debated.<br>
>>> Dismissing opposing views as "AI bots" does not, on its own, explain why<br>
>>> the arguments are wrong.<br>
>>> I believe the PDWG benefits most when participants engage with the<br>
>>> substance of each other's reasoning, regardless of how a contribution was<br>
>>> drafted.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Kind regards,<br>
>>> Fundiswa Nadia Maseko<br>
>>><br>
>>> On Sun, 19 Jul 2026, 19:13 Ben Roberts - AfriNIC, <<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:ben.roberts@afrinic.net" target="_blank">ben.roberts@afrinic.net</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:ben.roberts@afrinic.net" target="_blank">ben.roberts@afrinic.net</a>>> wrote:<br>
>>> Fundiswa,<br>
>>> But the AI bots opposing the AS-SET policy aren?t making technical<br>
>>> arguments. They are just regurgitating and re-using the same script. None<br>
>>> of them seem to know or care what an AS-SET is, or what network owners use<br>
>>> them for.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Cheers,<br>
>>> Ben<br>
>>> Sent from my iPhone<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> On 19 Jul 2026, at 17:56, Fundiswa Nadia Maseko <<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:fundiswanadia2@gmail.com" target="_blank">fundiswanadia2@gmail.com</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:fundiswanadia2@gmail.com" target="_blank">fundiswanadia2@gmail.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
>>> ?<br>
>>><br>
>>> Dear PDWG,<br>
>>><br>
>>> I have been following this discussion with interest, and I would like to<br>
>>> express my concern about the direction it has taken.<br>
>>><br>
>>> The Policy Development Process should evaluate technical arguments on<br>
>>> their merits. Whether a participant drafted a message unaided, received<br>
>>> editorial assistance, or used modern writing tools does not determine<br>
>>> whether the reasoning is sound. Speculating about authorship instead of<br>
>>> addressing the substance risks distracting the Working Group from the<br>
>>> policy questions before it.<br>
>>><br>
>>> I am also concerned by suggestions that contributions should be<br>
>>> disregarded simply because of assumptions about how they were written. If<br>
>>> there are factual or technical errors, they should be identified and<br>
>>> discussed. That is how consensus is strengthened.<br>
>>><br>
>>> The questions raised by several participants remain legitimate subjects<br>
>>> for technical debate: whether the proposal has demonstrated operational<br>
>>> necessity, whether the proposed intervention is proportionate, and whether<br>
>>> less restrictive alternatives have been adequately considered.<br>
>>><br>
>>> I therefore encourage all participants to continue engaging with the<br>
>>> substance of the proposal while maintaining the respectful and professional<br>
>>> standards expected within the PDWG.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Kind regards,<br>
>>><br>
>>> Fundiswa Nadia Maseko<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> RPD mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a>><br>
>>> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><<br>
>>> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>><br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> RPD mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a>><br>
>>> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><<br>
>>> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>><br>
>>> -------------- next part --------------<br>
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
>>> URL: <<br>
>>> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260719/f1cb5a98/attachment.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260719/f1cb5a98/attachment.html</a><br>
>>> ><br>
>>><br>
>>> ------------------------------<br>
>>><br>
>>> Subject: Digest Footer<br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> RPD mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
>>> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> ------------------------------<br>
>>><br>
>>> End of RPD Digest, Vol 222, Issue 71<br>
>>> ************************************<br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> RPD mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
>> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
>><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> RPD mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260720/ef93f424/attachment.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260720/ef93f424/attachment.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Subject: Digest Footer<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
End of RPD Digest, Vol 222, Issue 80<br>
************************************<br>
</blockquote></div><div><br clear="all"></div><div><br></div><span class="gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr" style="color:rgb(34,34,34);line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(227,90,1);font-family:Inter,sans-serif;font-size:11pt;font-weight:700">Onica N. Makwakwa</span></p><p style="color:rgb(34,34,34);line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><font color="#000000" face="Inter, sans-serif"><span style="font-size:14.6667px">Executive Director</span></font></p><p dir="ltr" style="color:rgb(34,34,34);line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Inter,sans-serif;color:rgb(227,90,1);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">p</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Inter,sans-serif;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline"> +27 63 237 3050 (WhatsApp/Signal)</span></p><p style="color:rgb(34,34,34);line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Inter,sans-serif;color:rgb(227,90,1);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">@ </span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Inter,sans-serif;background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline"><font color="#000000">AfroDiva</font></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="color:rgb(34,34,34);line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Inter,sans-serif;color:rgb(227,90,1);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">w </span><a href="http://globaldigitalinclusion.org/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Inter,sans-serif;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">globaldigitalinclusion.org</span></a></p><p dir="ltr" style="color:rgb(34,34,34);line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"> </p><p dir="ltr" style="color:rgb(34,34,34);line-height:1.656;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><a href="http://globaldigitalinclusion.org/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Inter,sans-serif;background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline"><span style="border-width:medium;border-style:none;border-color:currentcolor;display:inline-block;overflow:hidden;width:288px;height:58px"><img src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/Q6Q7RT9m5rUs2ZTUFLKv4admS34R7x3R60Ml9y5gsPNP1m62Pm5I4r8hZnP-3a_3RS3CDFoW8aFnKR1jHM425tTKvA_7-8y6-gsRSrL2QHJvUnzGcLQw3JZbnyZzIvbj5kb2gH67ohq1_TUA5Vla5XCPo2NWSfvKHwLXgYD7YfRfJuNTw6wGNayifcEa0g" width="288" height="58" style="margin-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"></span></span></a></p></div></div>