Lu I think you are misinterpreting the comment made.
I think both Omo and Adewole were supporting the principle you expressed (resource management is better addressed in policy than in a legal agreement). Apologies to both if I am misrepresenting you. The concern being raised is that absent specific policy on those issues we cannot remove those clauses from the RSA, lest we create a lacunae that could cause problems. The suggestion (as I view it) as that we propose and finalise policy to replace the items in the RSA and once the policy has been ratified, we agree a mechanism to remove that issue from the RSA. I did not see any ad hominem attack and I don’t think any was intended. Mike > On 3 Oct 2017, at 10:27, Lu Heng <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 3 October 2017 at 15:53, Omo Oaiya <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> On 3 Oct 2017, at 06:59, Lu Heng <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> >> >> Those ip addresses management clause inside RSA was written by lawyers, not >> the community. According to bottom up process, only policy can dictate how >> we use IP addresses. >> > > It is AfriNIC that facilitates this bottom up process. It is also it > responsibility to coordinate the management of INR. Some might say this is > its primary responsibility. > > Until a policy gets developed by the community, the RSA is the only mechanism > available for fufilling this management mandate. Your interest in removing > these clauses from the RSA is probably better served by proposing policy that > makes them redundant as Dewole suggests. > > -Omo > > > > "My interest" is a weird misinterpretation and completely not true(why must > it get personal every time, omo? ) I barely point out the clause that > contains IP address management material(and I might have missed some). > > Those words are written by lawyers to manage IP addresses - this shouldn't > happen in the very first place, because in the bottom up process, only > community-developed policies are able to manage the IP address, which is the > golden rule of bottom up process. Operators get to decide how they want to > use and manager the very resource they are using instead of lawyers. > > By your logic, if there is a missing item in the policy, we should simply ask > lawyers to add it to the RSA until community makes a redundant policy - but > this is not how PDP works. PDP is not served as a way to replicate what > lawyers wrote. Rather, if you think there is a missing item in the policy, > you will have to make a policy proposal, and see if community agrees. > > RSA should in no way serve as a complementary to the policy, rather, they are > two independent documents that serve for entirely different purposes. While > RSA allows AFRINIC to establish a legal relationship with its members so > AFRINIC can be funded, policies are specifically designed to manage internet > resources. > > > > > -- > -- > Kind regards. > Lu > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
