Hello Jordi,
When the Secretariat completes their review and impact assessment of policy proposals, it would be safe to make the assumption that they would be doing so with regard for Australian law, as it's the jurisdiction in which the Secretariat operates. If the Secretariat has said that if the intention is that they revoke resources used for network abuse they cannot do so under the mentioned provision as they cannot enforce terms of a contract it is not a party to, it is for good reason.
I do not possess any legal qualifications, so some things here may not be 100% accurate. APNIC recovering resources from the licensee (the organisation which received the initial delegation from APNIC) which they have sub-licensed by way of a temporary transfer to another party as the result of the execution of a contract, may open them up to legal challenges which would not in the interest of APNIC's members.
Further, there is a tool called ROSE-T (https://github.com/rose-tool/roset) which allows network operators to self-verify that they are MANRS-compliant. For APNIC to verify that an organisation is compliant, it would require them to have access to the member's network in order to verify compliance (e.g. to confirm that packets with spoofed source IP addresses cannot leave the member's network). For network security reasons, many network operators do not grant external access to third-parties.
I remain opposed to this proposal.
Regards,
Christopher H.
_______________________________________________ SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
