Alan Barrett

Alan Barrett est suivi comme personne, avec des elements qui eclairent son identite, son role ou son contexte operationnel.

Les données disponibles couvrent Rôles: Policy Development Working Group Co-chair, elected May 2012 (AFRINIC).

Dernière observation May 2012

Rôles: Policy Development Working Group Co-chair, elected May 2012 (AFRINIC)

Preuves

Type d'information: Alan Barrett merite d'etre suivi car les changements de role, de relations, de position de gouvernance ou de perimetre operationnel peuvent affecter les operations reseau et la visibilite du marche.

Détails associés

Alan Barrett
Appuie l'identite, le role ou le contexte organisationnel de Alan Barrett.
public people profile

Dernière mise à jour: 2026-09-25

Rôles

Role:Policy Development Working Group Co-chair, elected May 2012 (AFRINIC)· May 2012Non évaluéHistorique

Role:Interim Policy Development Working Group Co-chair (documented June 2011) (AFRINIC)Non évaluéHistorique

Faits sourcés

Participation aux politiques RIR

1RIR concernés

10Politiques suivies

13Messages de politique

9 mai 2011Première participation

28 nov. 2014Dernière participation

AFPUB-2012-DNS-001No Reverse Unless AssignedInconnue · 1 Messages de discussion
Cohérence du point de vue: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence
Alan reports rough consensus at AFRINIC-18 for No Reverse Unless Assigned and anticipates last call. This meeting-stage report is not a personal endorsement or a final ratification decision.
No Reverse Unless Assigned
Évaluation: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence · Alan reports rough consensus at AFRINIC-18 for No Reverse Unless Assigned and anticipates last call. This meeting-stage report is not a personal endorsement or a final ratification decision.
Réserves: Only one procedural report is supplied for this policy.
20 juin 2013
The following policy proposals acheieved rough consensus during the PDP discussions at the AFRINIC-18 meeting today.
20 juin 2013
* No Reverse Unless Assigned AFPUB-2012-DNS-001-DRAFT-02
afpub-2012-gen-001AFPUB-2012-GEN-001-DRAFT-02Inconnue · 2 Messages de discussion
Cohérence du point de vue: Aucune position explicite n’a été énoncée
AFPUB-2012-V4-001AFPUB-2012-V4-001-DRAFT-01Inconnue · 2 Messages de discussion
Cohérence du point de vue: Aucune position explicite n’a été énoncée
AFPUB-2013-GEN-001AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02Inconnue · 1 Messages de discussion
Cohérence du point de vue: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence
Alan includes Academic IPv4 Allocation among proposals that reached rough consensus at the meeting. No personal argument or later comparison for that policy is supplied here.
AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02
Évaluation: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence · Alan includes Academic IPv4 Allocation among proposals that reached rough consensus at the meeting. No personal argument or later comparison for that policy is supplied here.
Réserves: Meeting consensus and subsequent last-call outcomes must remain separate.
20 juin 2013
The following policy proposals acheieved rough consensus during the PDP discussions at the AFRINIC-18 meeting today.
20 juin 2013
* Academic IPv4 Allocation AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02
AFPUB-2013-V4-002-DRAFT-01 · AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02
Évaluation: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence · Different reported consensus outcomes for IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment and Academic IPv4 Allocation concern the meeting's treatment of different proposals. They are not evidence that Alan applies contradictory personal principles, because the message reports outcomes without stating his own substantive positions on either proposal.
Réserves: Both entries come from one meeting report, not two independent personal endorsements.
20 juin 2013
* Academic IPv4 Allocation AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02
20 juin 2013
AFPUB-2013-V4-001AFPUB-2013-V4-001-DRAFT-01Inconnue · 1 Messages de discussion
Cohérence du point de vue: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence
The Inter RIR IPv4 Address Transfers proposal appears under the meeting's no-consensus outcome. Alan's report alone cannot be used to label him opposed to transfers or to infer a reversal.
AFPUB-2013-V4-001-DRAFT-01
Évaluation: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence · The Inter RIR IPv4 Address Transfers proposal appears under the meeting's no-consensus outcome. Alan's report alone cannot be used to label him opposed to transfers or to infer a reversal.
Réserves: No consensus at this meeting does not itself mean withdrawal or board rejection.
20 juin 2013
The following policy proposal was also discussed today, but did not achieve consensus:
20 juin 2013
* Inter RIR IPv4 Address Transfers AFPUB-2013-V4-001-DRAFT-01
AFPUB-2013-V4-002AFPUB-2013-V4-002-DRAFT-01Inconnue · 1 Messages de discussion
Cohérence du point de vue: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence
Alan reports that the IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment proposal did not achieve consensus at the meeting. That observation does not establish his personal opposition or how his own position changed.
AFPUB-2013-V4-002-DRAFT-01
Évaluation: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence · Alan reports that the IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment proposal did not achieve consensus at the meeting. That observation does not establish his personal opposition or how his own position changed.
Réserves: A report of absent consensus is not a personal verdict on the proposal.
20 juin 2013
The following policy proposal was also discussed today, but did not achieve consensus:
20 juin 2013
* IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment AFPUB-2013-V4-002-DRAFT-01
AFPUB-2013-V4-002-DRAFT-01 · AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02
Évaluation: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence · Different reported consensus outcomes for IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment and Academic IPv4 Allocation concern the meeting's treatment of different proposals. They are not evidence that Alan applies contradictory personal principles, because the message reports outcomes without stating his own substantive positions on either proposal.
Réserves: Both entries come from one meeting report, not two independent personal endorsements.
20 juin 2013
* Academic IPv4 Allocation AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02
20 juin 2013
AFPUB-2013-V6-001AFPUB-2013-V6-001-DRAFT-01Inconnue · 1 Messages de discussion
Cohérence du point de vue: Aucune position explicite n’a été énoncée
afpub-2014-gen-003Anycast resource assignments in the AFRINIC regionInconnue · 1 Messages de discussion
Cohérence du point de vue: Aucune position explicite n’a été énoncée
AFPUB-2026-IPv4-001-DRAFT02IPv4 Soft LandingInconnue · 2 Messages de discussion
Cohérence du point de vue: Aucune position explicite n’a été énoncée
board-statement-2014-11-25-resource-allocationAFRINIC Board statement on resource allocation — 25 November 2014Soutien avec modifications · 1 Messages de discussion
Cohérence du point de vue: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence
Alan agrees with the board statement while emphasizing the letter and spirit of existing policy, checks proportionate to the requested space, and policy change through the PDP rather than ad hoc intervention. These positions fit together within this response; one exchange is insufficient to assess change over time. His closing question about an application is not evidence of its approval.
AFRINIC Board statement on resource allocation — 25 November 2014
Évaluation: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence · Alan agrees with the board statement while emphasizing the letter and spirit of existing policy, checks proportionate to the requested space, and policy change through the PDP rather than ad hoc intervention. These positions fit together within this response; one exchange is insufficient to assess change over time. His closing question about an application is not evidence of its approval.
Réserves: The response expresses a principle of policy-bound administration, not a verified decision on an individual application.
26 nov. 2014
I am in agreement with all of it
26 nov. 2014
both the letter and the spirit of the existing policies.
26 nov. 2014
the correct remedial action is not to petition the staff or the board to do things outside the policy, but rather to go through the policy development process to change the policy.