S. Moonesamy

Moonesamy como uma pessoa ligada a decisões, litígios, governança ou operações relevantes para a infraestrutura da internet; o cargo e a afiliação atuais ainda precisam ser verificados.

Os dados disponíveis abrangem Cargos: Interim Policy Development Working Group Co-chair (documented June 2011) (AFRINIC).

Mais recente 2026-09-25

Cargos: Interim Policy Development Working Group Co-chair (documented June 2011) (AFRINIC)

Evidências

Papel público: As fontes públicas citadas identificam S.
Tipo de informação: O papel público, as decisões ou a participação jurídica documentados de S. Moonesamy podem influenciar investimentos em redes, acesso ao mercado, políticas de infraestrutura ou limites de responsabilidade; este dossiê separa os registros citados da verificação do cargo atual.

Detalhes relacionados

S. Moonesamy
S. Moonesamy
public people profile
S. Moonesamy
Chairs: Alan Barrett <apb at cequrux.com> S. Moonesamy <sm+afrinic at elandsys.com>
public people profile

Última atualização: 2026-09-25

Cargos

Role:Interim Policy Development Working Group Co-chair (documented June 2011) (AFRINIC)Ainda não avaliadoHistórico

Fatos com fonte

Participação em políticas RIR

1RIRs com participação

9Políticas com participação

102Mensagens de política

9 de dez. de 2009Primeira participação

10 de jul. de 2013Última participação

afpub-2008-gen-001hereDesconhecida · 44 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada
AFPUB-2012-DNS-001No Reverse Unless AssignedDesconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência
The request to publish meeting comments does not endorse or reject reverse-delegation enforcement. This evidence alone provides no pair of substantive positions on No Reverse Unless Assigned to compare.
No Reverse Unless Assigned
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · The request to publish meeting comments does not endorse or reject reverse-delegation enforcement. This evidence alone provides no pair of substantive positions on No Reverse Unless Assigned to compare.
Condições: The finding concerns this reviewed person record and should not be read as proof that no other historical contributions exist.
10 de jul. de 2013
I couldn't find the comments from the last meeting. Is it possible to have the comments published?
Regional Internet Registry Privacy | AFPUB-2012-GEN-002-DRAFT-02 · No Reverse Unless Assigned
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · Seeking institutional input on the privacy draft and requesting published meeting comments both concern information needed for deliberation. That procedural similarity does not establish a common substantive position on privacy and reverse delegation, which regulate different matters. The evidence supports neither a contradiction nor a general claim of consistency across these policies.
Condições: The exchanges are separated by more than a year and concern different decisions. · Repeated associations of the July 2013 message add no independent comparison evidence.
16 de mai. de 2012
I asked AfriNIC for input about the above
10 de jul. de 2013
I couldn't find the comments from the last meeting.
afpub-2012-gen-001AFPUB-2012-GEN-001-DRAFT-02Desconhecida · 3 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada
afpub-2012-gen-002Regional Internet Registry Privacy | AFPUB-2012-GEN-002-DRAFT-02Apoio · 2 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência
The May 5 draft proposes data minimization and a three-month general retention period. On May 16, Moonesamy reports that he requested AFRINIC input and had not received a reply. The later message neither withdraws the draft nor endorses a different retention period, so it does not establish a change of substantive position. The supplied record contains only one articulated version of his privacy proposal.
Regional Internet Registry Privacy | AFPUB-2012-GEN-002-DRAFT-02
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · The May 5 draft proposes data minimization and a three-month general retention period. On May 16, Moonesamy reports that he requested AFRINIC input and had not received a reply. The later message neither withdraws the draft nor endorses a different retention period, so it does not establish a change of substantive position. The supplied record contains only one articulated version of his privacy proposal.
Condições: The three-month period belongs to this May 2012 draft, not a later draft or an adopted rule. · The absence of a reply is the author's report at that time, not independent proof of an institution-wide failure to respond.
5 de mai. de 2012
The retention period for Personal Identifiable Information is three months.
16 de mai. de 2012
I asked AfriNIC for input about the above ( https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2012/002136.html ). There has not been any reply.
Regional Internet Registry Privacy | AFPUB-2012-GEN-002-DRAFT-02 · No Reverse Unless Assigned
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · Seeking institutional input on the privacy draft and requesting published meeting comments both concern information needed for deliberation. That procedural similarity does not establish a common substantive position on privacy and reverse delegation, which regulate different matters. The evidence supports neither a contradiction nor a general claim of consistency across these policies.
AFPUB-2012-V4-001AFPUB-2012-V4-001-DRAFT-01Desconhecida · 4 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência
The available contribution requests access to meeting comments and contains no expressed position on the Anycast proposal. It cannot demonstrate either repeated support or a reversal on the allocation criteria.
AFPUB-2012-V4-001-DRAFT-01
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · The available contribution requests access to meeting comments and contains no expressed position on the Anycast proposal. It cannot demonstrate either repeated support or a reversal on the allocation criteria.
Condições: The same procedural message is linked to the four proposals considered together; it must be counted once when assessing the breadth of the speaker's evidence.
10 de jul. de 2013
I couldn't find the comments from the last meeting. Is it possible to have the comments published?
AFPUB-2013-GEN-001AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02Desconhecida · 3 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência
The shared request for meeting comments is procedural. It supplies no substantive position on the academic allocation proposal and no evidence of a change in such a position.
AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · The shared request for meeting comments is procedural. It supplies no substantive position on the academic allocation proposal and no evidence of a change in such a position.
Condições: A request to inspect the record is not a vote for or against the proposal.
10 de jul. de 2013
Is it possible to have the comments published?
AFPUB-2013-V4-002AFPUB-2013-V4-002-DRAFT-01Desconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada
AFPUB-2013-V6-001AFPUB-2013-V6-001-DRAFT-01Desconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência
Moonesamy asks for publication of comments from the last meeting. The request concerns the evidence available for evaluating the shared proceedings; it does not express support or opposition to this proposal's substantive rules.
AFPUB-2013-V6-001-DRAFT-01
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · Moonesamy asks for publication of comments from the last meeting. The request concerns the evidence available for evaluating the shared proceedings; it does not express support or opposition to this proposal's substantive rules.
Condições: This July 10, 2013 message is also associated with three other proposals; those associations do not constitute additional independent statements.
10 de jul. de 2013
I couldn't find the comments from the last meeting. Is it possible to have the comments published?
AFPUB-2026-IPv4-001-DRAFT02IPv4 Soft LandingDesconhecida · 43 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada