<html><body><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: Aptos, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Hi hendrik,</div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: Aptos, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: Aptos, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">By way of clarification.. After her initial objections to the policy, Dr Nyasha Ndemno wrote -</div><div style="direction: ltr; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: Aptos, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><i>"</i></span><span style="font-family: Aptos; color: rgb(33, 33, 33); text-transform: none;"><i>Thank you for the heads-up...I might have been coopted in a group or faction unaware...</i></span></div><div style="direction: ltr; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; font-family: Aptos; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(33, 33, 33);"><i><br></i></div><div style="font-family: Aptos; color: rgb(33, 33, 33);"><span style="font-size: 16px;"><i>Please note this will be rectified so that I participate more objectively. I am not on the discussion platform hence I do not see how the discussion go... I am not on the mailing list or discussion platform. Kindly allow me on the platform for me to participate objectively</i></span><i>…</i><span style="font-size: 16px;"><i>.”</i></span></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: Aptos; font-size: 16px; color: rgb(33, 33, 33);"><br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: Aptos; color: rgb(33, 33, 33);">And then she unsubscribed from the group. By this message, my reading of the words <b><i>"I might have been coopted in a group or faction unaware.” </i></b>it is that is that she was co-opted into something and wasn't aware of what was being posted in her name. It might be best for the co chairs to ignore her contributions therefore if they were not truly her views.</div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: Aptos; color: rgb(33, 33, 33);"><br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: Aptos; color: rgb(33, 33, 33);">Kind Regards</div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: Aptos; color: rgb(33, 33, 33);"><br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: Aptos; color: rgb(33, 33, 33);">Ben</div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: Aptos, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br></div><div id="ms-outlook-mobile-signature"><div class="MsoNormal" style="direction: ltr;">Get <a href="https://aka.ms/GetOutlookForMac" data-outlook-id="9cdf372b-19c3-4cb4-aaee-d0e23af82295">Outlook for Mac</a></div></div><div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container"><div style="padding: 3pt 0in 0in; border-width: 1pt medium medium; border-style: solid none none; border-color: rgb(181, 196, 223) currentcolor currentcolor;"><div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="text-align: left; font-family: Aptos; font-size: 12pt; color: black;"><b>From: </b>Hendrik Visage via RPD <rpd@afrinic.net><br><b>Date: </b>Thursday, 23 July 2026 at 11:15<br><b>To: </b>RPD mailing list <rpd@afrinic.net><br><b>Subject: </b>[rpd] [Last Call] AFPUB-2026-ASN-001-DRAFT02 — six open questions to those opposing<br><br></div></div><p class="markdown" style="direction: ltr;"><span style="font-family: sans-serif;">Dear all, and specifically those who have registered opposition — Nia Petronella / Nonhlanhla, Fundiswa Nadia Maseko, Gugu Dhlamini, Tshepo Masuku, Thulisile Mazomba, Asamkele Menzeleli, Thandeka Mseleku, Nyasha Ndemo, Nonjabulo Sphilile, Mphoentle Mokheseng, Phetulo Dhlamini, Mandla Matshika, NP Petronella, and colleagues —</span></p><p class="markdown" style="direction: ltr;"><span style="font-family: sans-serif;">The Co-Chairs have asked (21 July, </span><span style="font-family: sans-serif; color: rgb(57, 131, 196);"><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015237.html" data-outlook-id="d6ae09d7-4e7b-4c2b-bc55-ea2772c49ab2" style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196); margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015237.html</a></span><span style="font-family: sans-serif;"> ) that Last Call objections be new, fully justified, and that they engage what has already been addressed rather than repeat it. In that spirit, six concrete questions have been put to the opposition during the discussion and Last Call phases and remain unanswered. Restating general positions does not answer them. I ask, directly, that those maintaining opposition answer these — specifically and on the record.</span></p><ol start="1"><li style="font-family: sans-serif;"><p class="markdown" role="presentation" style="direction: ltr;">The two-object case (asked by Frank Habicht, <span style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196);"><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015076.html" data-outlook-id="ed2e055f-2f7e-437c-84e0-f03cb7193949" style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196); margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015076.html</a></span> , reiterated <span style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196);"><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015085.html" data-outlook-id="e78295a9-2955-4c54-9147-24cc9aa0375e" style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196); margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015085.html</a></span> and in <span style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196);"><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015120.html" data-outlook-id="d8d6c3a6-ccce-4bc8-b8a3-c24bc88e1b09" style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196); margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015120.html</a></span> ). An empty AS-GOOGLE object exists in the AFRINIC IRR while the populated AS-GOOGLE is in RADB. When filter-generation tooling (bgpq4 and similar) resolves the name across mirrored sources, what should it do — and how does any proposed alternative prevent the resulting mis-filtering, without the creation-time hierarchical rule this proposal introduces?</p></li><li style="font-family: sans-serif;"><p class="markdown" role="presentation" style="direction: ltr;">Squatting remedy (asked by Hendrik Visage, 19 July, <span style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196);"><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015120.html" data-outlook-id="27eac5ca-db8a-4b86-90b4-a89e61b705ba" style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196); margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015120.html</a></span> ). Under the "less restrictive alternatives" put forward (source-qualified lookups, ambiguity rejection, better tooling, warnings, voluntary adoption): what remedy does a victim have to get a squatted, same-named AS-SET removed from a database they do not control? Name the mechanism.</p></li><li style="font-family: sans-serif;"><p class="markdown" role="presentation" style="direction: ltr;">Yes or no (asked by Frank Habicht, <span style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196);"><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015123.html" data-outlook-id="dbce9ab3-e330-4674-aaea-c020d5a7c46e" style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196); margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015123.html</a></span> ). Do you agree the proposal provides an improvement? A direct yes or no, please — the question has so far been answered only by implication ( <span style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196);"><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015130.html" data-outlook-id="bed36162-83a6-4a42-85f5-76f7d707ae21" style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196); margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015130.html</a></span> ).</p></li><li style="font-family: sans-serif;"><p class="markdown" role="presentation" style="direction: ltr;">The evidence bar (arising from the opposition's own standard, <span style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196);"><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015130.html" data-outlook-id="51ca2d89-1026-4764-bac4-1098120bf869" style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196); margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015130.html</a></span> ). Opposition has held that the benefit must be "significant enough, proven enough, proportionate enough." What specific threshold would satisfy that test? Please state the bar you are applying, so it can be measured against the documented incidents (MANRS AS-AMAZON, 2022; the live AS-GOOGLE case above) and the four other RIRs' adoption.</p></li><li style="font-family: sans-serif;"><p class="markdown" role="presentation" style="direction: ltr;">The Impact Assessment (asked by Hendrik Visage, <span style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196);"><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015120.html" data-outlook-id="8be5d021-21c8-4d51-8fe2-6fc6ad043dcd" style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196); margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015120.html</a></span> ). The published staff Impact Assessment finds minimal member impact, no legal and no finance issues, with existing objects untouched. Which specific finding in it do you contest, and on what basis? The assertion that "the analysis has not been completed" needs to engage the analysis that exists.</p></li><li style="font-family: sans-serif;"><p class="markdown" role="presentation" style="direction: ltr;">Capacity (asked by Ben Roberts, <span style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196);"><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015131.html" data-outlook-id="a0803375-238a-4bbe-8b63-a34071d67c44" style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196); margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015131.html</a></span> ; now also Co-Chair guidance point 5, <span style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196);"><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015237.html" data-outlook-id="3849670e-0c34-470a-8fd1-77b755fd88ef" style="color: rgb(57, 131, 196); margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2026/015237.html</a></span> ). Are you contributing in your own individual capacity or on behalf of a resource member/organisation? The Co-Chairs' 21 July note asks contributors to say so. Please state it.</p></li></ol><p class="markdown" style="direction: ltr;"><span style="font-family: sans-serif;">To be clear on where the substance already stands: the distinction between authenticating an object's creation and validating its contents is real, it has been conceded by both sides, and it is out of the proposal's stated scope — the proposal claims name uniqueness and creation authorisation, not membership validity. That point, having been answered, does not by itself block consensus (RFC 7282). What remains is the six questions above.</span></p><p class="markdown" style="direction: ltr;"><span style="font-family: sans-serif;">If opposition is maintained through the close of Last Call, I ask that it be maintained by answering these — not by restating the original objections or by moving the discussion to who may participate. A concise, on-point answer to any of the six advances the discussion; a further restatement does not.</span></p><p class="markdown" style="direction: ltr;"><span style="font-family: sans-serif;">Regards,<br>
Hendrik Visage (AS329532 AS213481)</span></p></div></body></html>