[LACNIC/Politicas] Fwd: [Af13-all] Rapport Afrinic 13

[Arturo Servin]

	Este es un resumen de las políticas discutidas en el evento de Afrinic 13.

	Re-enviamos el mensaje sin modificaciones. Si la comunidad requiere traducción a Español o Portugués podemos trabajar en ello.

Saludos,
.as


Arturo L. Servin Niembro
Gerente Area Técnica | LACNIC
Tel.: +598 2 6042222 | Fax: +598 2 6042222 ext. 112
Rambla Rep. de México 6125 - C.P. 11400 | Montevideo, Uruguay
http://[2001:13c7:7002:4000::10]/sp/index.html



Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Jean Robert Hountomey" <hrobert at iservices.tg>
> Date: 4 December 2010 12:08:30 GMT-02:00
> To: "Emmanuel Oluka" <emma.oluka at appfrica.org>
> Cc: af13-all at afrinic.net
> Subject: Re: [Af13-all] Rapport Afrinic 13
> 
> This is a report on policy discussions at the AfriNIC-13 meeting, held
> in Johannesburg, South Africa on 24 and 25 November 2010.  More detailed
> minutes will be posted within the next three weeks.
> 
> Four policy proposals were discussed.
> 
> 
> AFPUB-2010-GEN-006
> Abuse Contact Information in the AfriNIC service region
> <http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/AFPUB-2010-GEN-006.htm>
> 
>     There was consensus on progressing this proposal to
>     Last Call.  No changes were suggested during the meeting.
> 
> AFPUB-2010-GEN-007
> Addition of Real Contact Email into ASN Whois Bulk Data
> <http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/AFPUB-2010-GEN-007.htm>
> 
>     This proposal did not gain consensus.  Some objections were that it
>     was too vague, that it seemed too specific to one particular user
>     of the data, and that the intent of the proposal could be satisfied
>     under the abuse contact information proposal (AFPUB-2010-GEN-006).
> 
> AFPUB-2010-v4-005
> IPv4 Soft Landing Proposal
> <http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/AFPUB-2010-v4-005.htm>
> 
>     There was consensus on progressing this proposal to Last Call.
> 
>     The following changes or clarifications were suggested, and all
>     gained consensus:
> 
>       * Policies under the exhaustion phase apply equally to all IPv4
>         address space available to AfriNIC during this phase, regardless
>         of whether or not the address space is part of the "Final /8".
> 
>       * Change the names of the two sub-phases within the Exhaustion
>         Phase (sections 6.1a and 6.1b) to "Exhaustion Phase 1" and
>         "Exhaustion Phase 2".
> 
>       * Clarify that the maximum allocation size of /22 (section 6.1b)
>         applies independently to each allocation.  There is no limit to
>         the number of times the same organisation may receive allocations
>         under this policy.
> 
>     There was a concern that the minimum allocation size of /27 (section
>     6.1b) would lead to problems with routability.  Other people
>     expressed the views that this proposal would probably remain in
>     effect for several years, that technology changes in future might
>     allow routability for small blocks, and that some allocations might
>     be used in ways that do not require global routability.  Consensus
>     was that this issue did not require any change to the proposal.
> 
> AFPUB-2010-v4-003
> AFPUB-2010-v4-006
> Global Policy for IPv4 Allocations by the IANA Post Exhaustion
> <http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/AFPUB-2010-v4-003.htm>
> <http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/AFPUB-2010-v4-006.htm>
> 
>     AFPUB-2010-v4-003 was presented at the Public Policy Meeting by
>     Martin Hannigan with some changes.  The outgoing PDP-MG (working
>     under the previous version of the Policy Development Process,
>     AFPUB-2008-GEN-001) had asked the authors of the proposal not to
>     post a new version of the proposal to the Resource Policy Discussion
>     mailing list as it was past the deadline of 18th November for
>     submitting changes.  The PDP-MG had advised the author to introduce
>     the changes during the Public Policy Meeting.
> 
>     It was pointed out during the Public Policy Meeting that the
>     changes should have been circulated for review.  During a break in
>     the discussion, Martin Hannigan posted an updated version of the
>     proposal.  The updated version was labelled AFPUB-2010-v4-006.
> 
>     It was noted that there is some urgency to this proposal, because the
>     IANA currently has no way of allocating IPv4 address space to RIRs
>     units smaller than a /8, the IANA pool of IPv4 space is likely to be
>     entirely depleted before the AfriNIC-14 meeting, and there is the
>     possibility that some legacy address space in units smaller than /8
>     might be returned to the IANA soon.
> 
>     The Working Group Chairs determined that there was rough consensus
>     in favour of the AFPUB-2010-v4-006 proposal, but there were concerns
>     about the fact that the version of the proposal presented at the
>     meeting was not the same as the version posted to the RPD mailing
>     list or posted on the AfriNIC web site before the meeting.
> 
>     As a result of confusion during the transition from the previous
>     Policy Development Process (AFPUB-2008-GEN-001) to the new Policy
>     Development Process (AFPUB-2010-GEN-005), the following requirement
>     of Section 5.2 of AFPUB-2010-GEN-005 was violated:
> 
>       "No change can be made to a draft policy within one week of the
>        meeting.  This is so that a stable version of the draft policy can
>        be considered at the meeting."
> 
>     There was a view to allow the proposal to progress to Last Call
>     despite concerns about the process.  There were comments about
>     following the process even though it would cause problems for a
>     proposal that otherwise has consensus, and some people expressed the
>     hope that a method could be found to allow the proposal to progress
>     rapidly without violating the process.
> 
>     The PDWG Chairs determined that, even though there was rough
>     consensus in favour of the proposal, compliance with the policy
>     development process requires that the proposal should not progress
>     to Last Call now.  Accordingly, discussion should continue on the
>     Resource Policy Discussion mailing list, and the proposal may be
>     considered again at the AfriNIC-14 meeting.  If passing this proposal
>     becomes urgent, it is possible that the emergency process (section 7
>     of AFPUB-2010-GEN-005) may be invoked before the AfriNIC-14 meeting.
> 
> 
> Alan Barrett and S. Moonesamy
> Interim co-chairs, AfriNIC Policy Development Working Group
> 26 November 2010
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Af13-all mailing list
> Af13-all at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/af13-all