Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Policy List

Original Language Español Date Published 02/08/2019 Last Modified 13/09/2019
Last Call for Comments Period 27/06/2019 - 18/07/2019 Date Ratified Does not apply Implementation Date Does not apply
Status Under discussion Download TXT PDF XML DOCX
See other versions 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 (compare)

Authors

Name: Jordi Palet Martinez
Email: jordi.palet@theipv6company.com
Organization: The IPv6 Company

Name: Edwin Salazar
Email: edwin.salazar@wifitelecom.ec
Organization: Wifitelecom

Proposal Data

Policy Type: LACNIC
Id: LAC-2018-13
Last version: 4
Presented at: LACNIC 32 Presentations:

Summary

This proposal seeks to implement an Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Policy List, as no such document currently exists.

Rationale

On several occasions there have been annoying activities that are contrary to the purpose and spirit of the Policy List, cases of misuse, various attacks and even election advertising.

Participants should have explicit knowledge of what can and cannot be done on the list, as well as of the potential penalties for infringing the rules. Otherwise, we will continue to see these actions that affect the community as a whole.

The global nature of list participants and the fact that they are posting from different time zones make it impossible to solve this issue either permanently or repetitively by implementing a temporary moderation of the list. This moderation affects the openness of the list and especially its dynamics, two essential features of the Policy Development Process, which specifies that the list must be “completely open.” Any form of moderation constitutes censorship, even if only temporary, and therefore breaches the principle of openness.

Text

Current text: does not exist

New text:

Note: The following text would be added at the end of the current PDP.)

8. Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Public Policy List

8.1. Purpose, Operation and Acceptable Use of the Public Policy List

The sole and exclusive purpose of the Public Policy List is the presentation and discussion of

policy-related aspects, including ideas, suggestions, proposals, results of the PDP, and other clearly related aspects.

Except in case of prior and explicit decision of the chairs, any discussion not in line with this purpose, such as event announcements, calls for papers, advertising of any kind (including electoral propaganda), expressions of support for candidates and, in general, any topic that is not explicitly policy-related, is outside the scope of this list. Note that the examples listed above are for illustrative purposes only.

Only the chairs and/or LACNIC staff may call for and/or announce candidates and the voting procedure. The remaining steps of the procedure will necessarily take place off the list. By way of example, candidate nominations, expressions for or against a candidate or other similar actions are not allowed on the list.

Only the chairs may issue a warning to those in violation of the AUP and take the corresponding actions, announcing their decision through the list. Any suspected violation must be reported exclusively to the chairs.

A link to the PDP and the text of the AUP will be sent to each new list subscriber, who must explicitly check their acceptance. Until confirming this link by checking both options, the subscriber will only be able to receive messages from the list. If subscription reminders are sent, such messages must also remind subscribers of the AUP.

Likewise, at the bottom of each message, a link will be included to allow list subscribers to manage their subscription preferences.

LACNIC will periodically add different email addresses outside its domains to be used as a honeypot.

Mailing list posts are archived, they are publicly available and may not be censored by LACNIC.

In very exceptional cases, the chairs may decide the temporary moderation of the list, informing of such moderation and the reasons for their decision, for example, to avoid “attacks” of any kind that might affect the normal functioning of the list. Such moderation will be only for brief, perfectly defined periods of time, ensuring that messages will not be delayed longer than strictly necessary. For this, the chairs will be supported by the staff.

The AUP has been designed based on current use, as an official means of communication of the PDP, of the Public Policy List. However, if additional systems other than the list are used in the future (e.g. forums or applications) that “replicate” the list (i.e. if everything that is posted on the list is automatically posted on such systems and vice versa), the AUP

will apply under the same or technically equivalent conditions.

8.2. Violations of the Applicable Use Policy (AUP) for the Policy List

At the discretion of the chairs, the following are considered violations of the AUP:
a) Any use of the list that goes against the section above, as well as any announcement without the prior and explicit authorization of the chairs, including those related to an election process.
b) Ad hominem attacks, foul language, disrespect, and the sending (or forwarding) of private messages (unless with the prior and explicit consent of the parties involved).
c) Replies to inappropriate messages.
d) Auto-reply messages, unsubscribe, email address modification and other similar requests.

In addition, when evidence exists:
e) Use of the list to collect participants’ contact information and the use of such information to send spam (any previously and explicitly unrequested email).
f) Any attempt to commit fraud or bypass a penalty, for example, by using alternative mail addresses. The chairs may determine what other actions also constitute unacceptable uses of the list.

8.3. Penalties in Case of Violation of the AUP

Considering the global nature of list participants, when deciding on potential violations of the AUP, the chairs will take into account any relevant cultural aspects and language differences.

The first violation of the AUP may result in a temporary suspension of the offender's right to post to the list for a period of one (1) month, which may be extended up to one (1) year in case of a second violation. At the discretion of the chairs, successive violations may result in longer suspensions.

Violations relating to election processes are considered extremely serious and may result in the loss of the right to participate as a candidate, as well as of the right to nominate candidates, in election processes for two (2) years and for up to four (4) years in case of repeated violations.

Additional Information

If this proposal achieves consensus, once it is ratified by the Board, this text will be emailed to all Public Policy List subscribers along with a link to a page where they will have to explicitly check their acceptance of the AUP and confirm that they are familiar with the PDP. Until confirming this link by checking both options, the subscriber will only be able to receive messages from the list.

If system used for the list (mailman or similar) creates any difficulties for implementing the proposal, it is expected that the proposal will become effective once it reaches consensus, even if certain “technical” aspects cannot be immediately implemented. For example, it would be enough to immediately send the AUP to the Policy list without limiting subscribers’ ability to post to the list, and then, once the system is ready, subscribers would be required to accept the AUP in order to continue to post to the list.

Timetable

Immediate implementation

References

AUPs are commonly used for mailing lists, including those of several RIRs. Many examples were considered when drafting this proposal.

Public Comments by LACNIC Staff

LACNIC STAFF´S IMPACT ANALYSIS - Proposal LAC-2018-13 - version 4

LACNIC Staff's Interpretation of the Proposal
--------------------------------------------

Applicability
-------------
This proposal would apply to, and be enforced for, all participants of the Policy mailing list.

Modifications to the current text
--------------------------------
This proposal would be added as Section 8 of the PDP, Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Public Policy List (https://www.lacnic.net/542/1/lacnic/).

LACNIC Staff Comments
-------------------------
The new version:
1. Modifies the limitation that establishes that any temporary moderation decided by the chairs will not be delayed “more than 8 hours” to “will not be delayed longer than strictly necessary.”

2. Changes the scope of the proposal from any type of application to “additional systems other than the list [that may be] used in the future (e.g. forums or applications) that ‘replicate’ the list.”

3. Modifies the penalty for violations relating to an election process, reducing the time during which offenders may lose their right to participate as a candidate/nominate a candidate from 4 to 2 years.

4. Adds that the following actions that are considered violations of the AUP:
a. Use of the list to collect participants’ contact information and the use of such information to send spam (any previously and explicitly unrequested email).
b. Any attempt to commit fraud or bypass a penalty, for example, by using alternative mail addresses.
Will be considered when evidence exists to support such claims.

In other words, LACNIC interprets that these checks will not be constantly performed for ALL the email addresses subscribed the list, but that instead such cases will be analyzed only if there is concrete evidence to support any claim in this sense.

5. The proposal states that “Violations of item i) above may result in the loss of the right to be a candidate, as well as the right to nominate candidates, in election processes for four (4) years.” LACNIC understands that this refers to community election processes and excludes the election processes that have to do with member rights and obligations.

Recommendations
------------------
We recommend maintaining the possibility of temporary moderation by LACNIC staff in exceptional circumstances, e.g. for security reasons or in cases where a violation of the AUP would affect other important processes, or in any other situation not covered in this policy. In addition, we suggest adding that LACNIC must notify the list when it is being moderated and justify the reason for the moderation.

Moderation of the list in the other RIRs:
o ARIN reserves the right to maintain order and decorum on the mailing lists it manages, to include imposing disciplinary actions on individual mailing list subscribers. In response to violation of the code, ARIN may issue a warning to the offender, revoke the offender's posting privileges, or filter a message that violates the code.

o APNIC does not routinely moderate the discussions on the APNIC mailing lists. However, APNIC reserves the right to delete or redact comments that APNIC considers to be unacceptable.

o RIPE NCC: The chairs have the authority to moderate or ban disruptive members if they decide this is necessary.

o AFRINIC: In the policy mailing list, the responsibility for enforcing the code of conduct lies with the chairs. In the members and community mailing lists, this responsibility lies with the CEO, or staff designated by the CEO.

Context: Codes of Conduct in other RIRs
-----------------------------------------
Other RIRs have a generic code of conduct for all their mailing lists, but no specific code for the policy list.
o ARIN: The AUP for the lists was defined by the ARIN Board.
o RIPE NCC: The code of conduct was drafted by RIPE NCC and reviewed and approved by the chairs of the RIPE working groups.
https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/cc/summaries/draft-ripe-74-working-group-chair-meeting-summary (second agenda item)
o APNIC: The code of conduct was drafted by APNIC with the support of its legal team.
o AFRINIC: The code of conduct was drafted by the AFRINIC Board. It is regulated by the policy list chairs.

Official Sources:
-----------------
• RIPE Mailing List / RIPE Forum Code of Conduct: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/ripe-mailing-list-ripe-forum-code-of-conduct
• ARIN Mailing List Acceptable Use Policy:
https://www.arin.net/participate/mailing_lists/aup.html
• APNIC Mailing List Code of Conduct: https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/mailinglists/code-of-conduct/
• AFRINIC Community Code of Conduct:
https://www.afrinic.net/code
• RIPE 74 Working Group Chair Meeting Summary - Budapest, 11 May 2017
https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/cc/summaries/draft-ripe-74-working-group-chair-meeting-summary (second agenda item)

Impact of the policy on LACNIC's systems
---------------------------
This proposal would involve changes to implement the following:
“A link to the PDP and the text of the AUP will be sent to each new list subscriber, who must explicitly check their acceptance. Until confirming this link by checking both options, the subscriber will only be able to receive messages from the list. If subscription reminders are sent, such messages must also remind subscribers of the AUP.”

LACNIC STAFF´S IMPACT ANALYSIS - Proposal LAC-2018-13 - version 3

LACNIC Staff's Interpretation of the Proposal
---------------------------------------------

Applicability
------------
This proposal would apply to, and be enforced for, all participants of the Policy mailing list.

Modifications to the current text
--------------------------------
This proposal would be added to the PDP https://www.lacnic.net/542/1/lacnic/ as Section 8. Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Public Policy List.

LACNIC Staff Comments
------------------------
The new version:
1. Divides the proposal into subsections: Purpose, Operation and Acceptable Use; Violations and Penalties.
2. Modifies the following text: “Inappropriate responses to inappropriate messages posted to the list by a third party also constitute a violation of the AUP,” replacing it with “Responses to inappropriate messages.”
3. Modifies other details of the text of the proposal.

The proposal states that “Violations of item i) above may result in the loss of the right to be a candidate, as well as the right to nominate candidates, in election processes for four (4) years.” LACNIC understands that this refers to community election processes and excludes the election processes that have to do with member rights and obligations.

Recommendations
-------------------
1. We recommend maintaining the possibility of temporary moderation by LACNIC staff in exceptional circumstances, e.g. for security reasons or in cases where a violation of the AUP would affect other important processes, or in any other situation not covered in this policy. In addition, we suggest adding that LACNIC must notify the list when it is being moderated and justify the reason for the moderation.

2. Subsection 8.1 specifies that, in the exceptional case where the list is moderated, messages cannot be delayed more than eight hours. Considering that moderation is a manual process and that the list moderator might be traveling and/or not connected to the Internet for a period longer than eight hours, even considering weekends, we find this term to be too demanding. Although the moderator would be supported by the LACNIC staff, we recommend not defining a specific period of time, or at least extending this period so as not to cause a violation simply because a message is delayed by a few hours.

3. In Section 8.2, we recommend clarifying how to validate the following:
a. “Any attempt to commit fraud or bypass a penalty, such as the use of alternative mail addresses.”
b. “Using the list to collect participants’ contact information and using such information for sending spam.”
While specific cases may be studied in depth, LACNIC interprets that such validations will not be conducted continuously on ALL the addresses that are part of the list.

Moderation of the list in the other RIRs
----------------------------------------
o ARIN reserves the right to maintain order and decorum on the mailing lists it manages, to include imposing disciplinary actions on individual mailing list subscribers. In response to violation of the code, ARIN may issue a warning to the offender, revoke the offender's posting privileges, or filter a message that violates the code.
APNIC does not routinely moderate the discussions on the APNIC mailing lists. However, APNIC reserves the right to delete or redact comments that APNIC considers to be unacceptable.

o RIPE NCC: Chairs have the authority to moderate or ban disruptive members if they decide this is necessary.

o AFRINIC: In the policy mailing list, the responsibility to enforce the code of conduct lies with the chairs.
In the members and community mailing lists, this responsibility lies with the CEO, or staff designated by the CEO.

Context: Codes of Conduct in other RIRs
----------------------------------------
Other RIRs have a generic code of conduct for all their mailing lists, but no specific code for the policy list.

o ARIN: The AUP for the lists was defined by the ARIN Board.
o RIPE NCC: The code of conduct was drafted by RIPE NCC and reviewed and approved by the chairs of the RIPE working groups.
https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/cc/summaries/draft-ripe-74-working-group-chair-meeting-summary (second agenda item)
o APNIC: The code of conduct was drafted by APNIC with the support of its legal team.
o AFRINIC: The code of conduct was drafted by the AFRINIC Board. It is regulated by the policy list chairs.

Official Sources:
-----------------
• RIPE Mailing List / RIPE Forum Code of Conduct: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/ripe-mailing-list-ripe-forum-code-of-conduct
• ARIN Mailing List Acceptable Use Policy:
https://www.arin.net/participate/mailing_lists/aup.html
• APNIC Mailing List Code of Conduct: https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/mailinglists/code-of-conduct/
• AFRINIC Community Code of Conduct:
https://www.afrinic.net/code
• RIPE 74 Working Group Chair Meeting Summary - Budapest, 11 May 2017
https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/cc/summaries/draft-ripe-74-working-group-chair-meeting-summary

Impact of the policy on the registry system and address management
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal would not require any changes to the registration system.

LACNIC STAFF´S IMPACT ANALYSIS - Proposal LAC-2018-13 - versión 2

LACNIC Staff's Interpretation of the Proposal
---------------------------------------------

Applicability
------------
This proposal would apply and be enforced for all Policy List participants.

Modifications to the current text
--------------------------------
This proposal would be added to the PDP https://www.lacnic.net/542/1/lacnic/ as Section 8. Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Public Policy List.

LACNIC Staff Comments
------------------------
The new version
1. Incorporates certain clarifications suggested in the impact analysis prepared for the first version of the proposal.
2. It creates a new Section 8.1. that addresses policy violations.

The proposal states that “Violations of item i) above may result in the loss of the right to be a candidate, as well as the right to nominate candidates, in election processes for four (4) years.” LACNIC understands that this refers to community election processes and excludes the election processes that have to do with member rights and obligations.

Recommendations
--------------------
1. We recommend maintaining the possibility of temporary moderation by LACNIC staff in exceptional circumstances, e.g. for security reasons or in cases where violation of the AUP would affect other important processes, or in any other situation not covered in this policy. In addition, we suggest adding that LACNIC must notify the list when it is being moderated and justify the reason for the moderation.

2. Item m) specifies that, in the exceptional case where the list is moderated, messages cannot be delayed more than eight hours. Considering that moderation is a manual process and that the list moderator might be traveling and/or not connected to the Internet for a period longer than eight hours, we find this period to be too demanding. Although the moderator would be supported by the LACNIC staff, we recommend not defining a specific period of time, or at least extending this period of time so as not to generate a violation because the sending of a message is delayed by a few hours.

3. In paragraph c) it is not clear what must be done “outside the list.” LACNIC interprets that this refers to the voting process, as the election dates and results are announced through the list. We recommend clarifying this item.

4. We recommend clarifying how to validate:
a. Item i) “Attempted fraud by a suspended participant, e.g. the use of an alternative email address, is also considered a violation of the AUP.”
b. Item j) “Other violations of the AUP include using the list to collect participants’ contact information and using such information for sending spam.

5. We recommend clarifying the definition of “honeypot” in item h).

Moderation of the list in the other RIRs
------------------------------------------

o ARIN reserves the right to maintain order and decorum on the mailing lists it manages, to include imposing disciplinary actions on individual mailing list subscribers. In response to a violation of the code, ARIN may issue a warning to the offender, revoke the offender's posting privileges, or filter a message that violates the code.

o APNIC does not routinely moderate the discussions on the APNIC mailing lists. However, APNIC reserves the right to delete or redact comments that APNIC considers to be unacceptable.

o RIPE NCC: Chairs have the authority to moderate or ban disruptive members if they decide this is necessary.

o AFRINIC: In the policy mailing list, the responsibility of enforcing the code of conduct lies with the chairs. In the members and community mailing lists, this responsibility lies with the CEO, or staff designated by the CEO.

Context: Codes of Conduct in other RIRs
-----------------------------------------

Other RIRs have a generic code of conduct for all their mailing lists, but no specific code for the policy list.
o ARIN: The AUP for the lists was defined by the ARIN Board.
o RIPE NCC: The code of conduct was drafted by RIPE NCC and reviewed and approved by the chairs of the RIPE working groups.
https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/cc/summaries/draft-ripe-74-working-group-chair-meeting-summary (second item on the agenda)
o APNIC: The code of conduct was drafted by APNIC with the support of its legal team.
o AFRINIC: The code of conduct was drafted by the AFRINIC Board. It is regulated by the policy list chairs.

Official Sources
-----------------
o RIPE Mailing List / RIPE Forum Code of Conduct: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/ripe-mailing-list-ripe-forum-code-of-conduct
o ARIN Mailing List Acceptable Use Policy:
https://www.arin.net/participate/mailing_lists/aup.html
o APNIC Mailing List Code of Conduct: https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/mailinglists/code-of-conduct/
o AFRINIC Community Code of Conduct:
https://www.afrinic.net/code
o RIPE 74 Working Group Chair Meeting Summary - Budapest, 11 May 2017
https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/cc/summaries/draft-ripe-74-working-group-chair-meeting-summary

Impact of the policy on the registry system and address management
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal would not require any changes to the registration system.

ACNIC STAFF´S IMPACT ANALYSIS - Proposal LAC-2018-13 - versión 1

LACNIC Staff’s Interpretation of the Proposal
----------------------------------------------

Applicability
-------------
This proposal would apply to, and be enforced for, all participants of the Policy mailing list.

Modifications to the current text
--------------------------------
This proposal would be added to the PDP https://www.lacnic.net/542/1/lacnic/
as Section 8. Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the Public Policy List.

LACNIC Staff Comments
------------------------
• We recommend maintaining the possibility of temporary moderation by LACNIC staff in exceptional circumstances, e.g. for security reasons or in cases where non-compliance with the AUP would affect other important processes, or in any other situation not contemplated in this policy. In addition, we suggest adding that, when LACNIC moderates the list, it must notify the list and justify the reason for the moderation.

• Moderation of the policy mailing list in the other RIRs:
o ARIN: ARIN reserves the right to maintain order and decorum on the mailing lists it manages, to include imposing disciplinary actions on individual mailing list subscribers. In response to violation of the code, ARIN may issue a warning to the offender, revoke the offender's posting privileges, or filter a message that violates the code.

o APNIC: APNIC does not routinely moderate the discussions on the APNIC mailing lists. However, APNIC reserves the right to delete or redact comments that APNIC considers to be unacceptable.

o RIPE NCC: Chairs have the authority to moderate or ban disruptive members if they decide this is necessary.

o AFRINIC: In the policy mailing list, the responsibility to enforce the code of conduct lies with the chairs. In the members and community mailing lists, this responsibility lies with the CEO, or staff designated by the CEO.

• Context: Other RIRs have a generic code of conduct for all their mailing lists, but no specific code for the policy list.
o ARIN: The AUP for the lists was defined by the ARIN Board.
o RIPE NCC: The code of conduct was drafted by RIPE NCC and reviewed and approved by the chairs of the RIPE working groups.
https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/cc/summaries/draft-ripe-74-working-group-chair-meeting-summary (second agenda item).
o APNIC: The code of conduct was drafted by APNIC with the support of its legal team.
o AFRINIC: The code of conduct was drafted by the AFRINIC Board. It is regulated by the policy list chairs.

• Item n) specifies that this text must be emailed to all policy list subscribers before each election process that takes place in the community. There are several election processes in LACNIC over the course of each year, which means that list subscribers would receive too much information which might not be of interest to them.
One suggestion might be to include the text in the initial message users receive when they subscribe to the list.

• Item p) specifies that in the exceptional cases where the list is moderated, messages cannot be delayed for more than eight hours. Considering that moderation is a manual process and that the list moderator might be traveling and/or not connected to the Internet for a period longer than eight hours, we find this period to be too demanding.

• We recommend that the moderators should have the possibility of requesting assistance from LACNIC staff in case the moderators cannot respond within the required timeframe.

• In section c) it is not clear what must be done “outside the list.”
LACNIC interprets that this refers to the voting process, as the election dates and results are announced through the list. We recommend clarifying this item.

• It is recommended to clarify how to validate point j) "Other violations of the AUP include using the list to collect participants’ contact information and using such information for sending spam".

Official Sources
----------------
• RIPE Mailing List / RIPE Forum Code of Conduct: https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/ripe-mailing-list-ripe-forum-code-of-conduct
• ARIN Mailing List Acceptable Use Policy:
https://www.arin.net/participate/mailing_lists/aup.html
• APNIC Mailing List Code of Conduct: https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/mailinglists/code-of-conduct/
• AFRINIC Community Code of Conduct:
https://www.afrinic.net/code
• RIPE 74 Working Group Chair Meeting Summary - Budapest, 11 May 2017
https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/cc/summaries/draft-ripe-74-working-group-chair-meeting-summary

Impact of the policy on the registration system and address management
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal would not require any changes to the registration system.

Privacy Policy