Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] proposition de politique

While I do not support the concept of NIR’s – the strongest argument against the NIR’s is to prove the bottom up approach is functional and works correctly. That means: 1. A PDP that is not tied to geopolitical/linguistic politics and where location of author means more than the policy

Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] proposition de politique

When I said bylaws, I was actually thinking in membership agreement, but actually either way (or both) may work. Regards, Jordi De: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ Fecha: martes, 8 de mayo de 2018, 12:26 Para: AfriNIC Resource Policy ,

Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] proposition de politique

I’ve also the same opinion, in general NIRs are not needed, but I have the feeling that this may be beyond the scope of AfriNIC. What happen if a country law mandate it? Then AfriNIC members of that country will be mandated by law to go via the NIR. Of course, you can “strongly

Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] proposition de politique

Totally agree with you. I believe that NIRs would potentially break (harm) the whole bottom-up approach. They could also have different policies and it also potentially breaks ISP's that have cross-border activities. I like it that AfriNIC currently has no NIRs. On 08/05/2018 13:23, Kossi