S. Moonesamy

Moonesamy как на человека, связанного с решениями, судебными делами, управлением или эксплуатацией интернет-инфраструктуры; текущая должность и принадлежность ещё требуют проверки.

Доступные данные охватывают Роли: Interim Policy Development Working Group Co-chair (documented June 2011) (AFRINIC).

Последние 2026-09-25

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

Уверенность

Публичная роль: Цитируемые открытые источники указывают на S.
Тип данных: Документированные сведения о публичной роли, решениях или участии S. Moonesamy в правовых вопросах могут влиять на инвестиции в сети, доступ на рынок, инфраструктурную политику или границы ответственности; досье отделяет цитируемые сведения от проверки текущей должности.

Связанные сведения

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

Последнее обновление: 2026-09-25

Роли

Role:Interim Policy Development Working Group Co-chair (documented June 2011) (AFRINIC)Ещё не оцененоИсторические сведения

Факты из источников

Участие в обсуждении политики RIR

1Участие по реестрам RIR

9Предложения с участием

102Всего сообщений в обсуждениях

9 дек. 2009 г.Первое участие

10 июл. 2013 г.Последнее участие

afpub-2008-gen-001hereНеизвестно · 44 Сообщения в обсуждении
Согласованность позиции: Явная позиция не заявлена
AFPUB-2012-DNS-001No Reverse Unless AssignedНеизвестно · 1 Сообщения в обсуждении
Согласованность позиции: Недостаточно доказательств для оценки согласованности
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
Оценка: Недостаточно доказательств для оценки согласованности · 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.
Условия: The finding concerns this reviewed person record and should not be read as proof that no other historical contributions exist.
10 июл. 2013 г.
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
Оценка: Недостаточно доказательств для оценки согласованности · 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.
Условия: 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 мая 2012 г.
I asked AfriNIC for input about the above
10 июл. 2013 г.
I couldn't find the comments from the last meeting.
afpub-2012-gen-001AFPUB-2012-GEN-001-DRAFT-02Неизвестно · 3 Сообщения в обсуждении
Согласованность позиции: Явная позиция не заявлена
afpub-2012-gen-002Regional Internet Registry Privacy | AFPUB-2012-GEN-002-DRAFT-02Поддержка · 2 Сообщения в обсуждении
Согласованность позиции: Недостаточно доказательств для оценки согласованности
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
Оценка: Недостаточно доказательств для оценки согласованности · 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.
Условия: 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 мая 2012 г.
The retention period for Personal Identifiable Information is three months.
16 мая 2012 г.
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
Оценка: Недостаточно доказательств для оценки согласованности · 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-01Неизвестно · 4 Сообщения в обсуждении
Согласованность позиции: Недостаточно доказательств для оценки согласованности
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
Оценка: Недостаточно доказательств для оценки согласованности · 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.
Условия: 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 июл. 2013 г.
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-02Неизвестно · 3 Сообщения в обсуждении
Согласованность позиции: Недостаточно доказательств для оценки согласованности
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
Оценка: Недостаточно доказательств для оценки согласованности · 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.
Условия: A request to inspect the record is not a vote for or against the proposal.
10 июл. 2013 г.
Is it possible to have the comments published?
AFPUB-2013-V4-002AFPUB-2013-V4-002-DRAFT-01Неизвестно · 1 Сообщения в обсуждении
Согласованность позиции: Явная позиция не заявлена
AFPUB-2013-V6-001AFPUB-2013-V6-001-DRAFT-01Неизвестно · 1 Сообщения в обсуждении
Согласованность позиции: Недостаточно доказательств для оценки согласованности
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
Оценка: Недостаточно доказательств для оценки согласованности · 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.
Условия: This July 10, 2013 message is also associated with three other proposals; those associations do not constitute additional independent statements.
10 июл. 2013 г.
I couldn't find the comments from the last meeting. Is it possible to have the comments published?
AFPUB-2026-IPv4-001-DRAFT02IPv4 Soft LandingНеизвестно · 43 Сообщения в обсуждении
Согласованность позиции: Явная позиция не заявлена