[Community-Discuss] Issue with non-AFRINIC Fellowship to Meeting -

Saul Stein saul at enetworks.co.za
Tue Dec 18 07:21:01 UTC 2018


Instead of this mudslinging match / personal witch hunt, which has no place 
on this (or any) mailing list and clogging up our inboxes, perhaps this 
energy could be better put to addressing the communities concerns about this 


From: Omo Oaiya [mailto:Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net]
Sent: 18 December 2018 07:58 AM
To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Issue with non-AFRINIC Fellowship to 
Meeting -

On 15 Dec 2018, at 03:39, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com 
<mailto:owen at delong.com> > wrote:

My first work with Larus began shortly before the Dakar meeting last June. 
You can review the record for yourself, you will see that I have expressed 
objection to every version of the review policy since its inception well 
before the Dakar meeting and well before my having any connection whatsoever 
to Larus.


Your spirited defence of Larus and the revelation that you have been 
employed by same organisation piqued my interest so I reviewed the record as 
you suggested.

Anyone is allowed to change their minds.  The records show that you 
initially supported the proposal,  changed your position along the line, and 
became vehemently opposed to it thereafter.

Here is what I found in the archives:

18 May 2016 - v1.0 of the proposal was submitted

24 May 2016 - You point to ARIN review policy when there are comments about 
implementation impact on AFRINIC and queries if any other RIR had done this 

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com 
<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd> > wrote:

> On May 23, 2016, at 11:30 , Benjamin Eshun <beshun at garnet.edu.gh 
> <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd> > wrote:
> Comments are in line....
> On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Nishal Goburdhan <
> nishal at controlfreak.co.za 
> <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd> > wrote:
> ok, so using that logic, can is there another RIR that has successfully
>> shown, how this can be done?  the case across the world, seems to be that
>> this is too much effort, for too little gain.  so, honestly, unless there’s
>> some magician that can show how/why this is likely to be different in
>> africa, it’s reasonable to assume that this is also going to be the case
>> here.
>> as a paying member, i want afrinic - using its limited resources - to
>> prioritise that, which will take us forward.
> I refer you to ARIN NRPM section 12.
> Owen


At this time, you appear to be positively disposed to the proposal and I 
find email below where you actually express your support when there seems to 
be a misunderstanding of your “IPv4 is dead” claim.

>From the text, it even seems that I may have missed other mails supporting 
for the policy.

> On Jun 1, 2016, at 11:19 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com 
> <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd> > wrote:
> I’ve already expressed support for this policy. I’ve already expressed 
> support for keeping AfriNIC resources for Africa.
> I’ve done so on numerous occasions.
> So I am really not sure what point you are trying to make to me.


Fast-forward a year later to July 2017, by which time the proposal has 
reached last call for the first time.  It is now at v3.0 and the tone of 
your messages begin to change up to the point that I feel you are 
obstructing the Co-chairs and adding to the confusion.

On 10 July 2017 at 23:18, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com 
<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd> > wrote:

> Sami,
> The final legal feedback notwithstanding, I think there has been more than
> enough negative feedback in this last call to make it quite clear that 
> this
> policy does NOT have consensus at this time and I urge the co-chairs to
> remand it to the authors and the list for further refinement or 
> abandonment
> rather than leaving it in last call status. There is no reason for last
> call to be maintained beyond the point where clearly the policy has no
> consensus as is and will need substantial revision. It only confuses the
> community.
> Owen


By now, you are very vocal and have issues with the proposal you had 
previously supported and improved with community input to reach last call at 
v3.0.   You become a champion for its opposition.

On 11 Jul 2017, at 18:39, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com 
<mailto:owen at delong.com> > wrote:

I am not opposed to the concept of resource reviews… In fact, the policy in 
section 12 of the ARIN NRPM to which you refer below was originally proposed 
and authored by yours truly and subsequently modified by a group of people 
prior to becoming ARIN policy.

I fully support the idea, the concept, and a proper implementation.

However, the dichotomy between the above idea of a proper implementation and 
what is proposed in AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT-04 is so severe that many 
people have raised substantive objections.

What I find most interesting about this is that despite the repeated raising 
of these same objections to this proposal, the proponents choose to hand 
waive, point to policies at other RIRs (which, btw, lack the very flaws 
being pointed out in this proposal) and attempt to shout down the opposition 
without actually making any indication that the objections have been 
considered, let alone any effort to actually address said objections.



It is difficult to understand your failure to contribute to the proposal so 
it meets your nebulous idea of a “proper implementation” considering your 
experience with the ARIN proposal.   The proposal kept on evolving 
nonetheless, up to v6.0, addressing valid objections and comments from legal 
and staff.

In recent discussions, you disclosed (and repeated) that you have worked for 
Larus (who vigorously opposes the proposal and has done from inception) but 
claim that this does not influence your position. According to you, this 
Larus work started just before the Dakar meeting in April 2018 and your 
opposition predates your employment.

Only you and Larus know exactly when you started but the evidence in the 
archives show that you only became diametrically opposed to the policy 
midstream and your claim of opposition from the start is untrue.  I also 
recall challenging another of your contradictory claims in the past and see 
a pattern here.

To the PDWG and Co-Chairs,

Given the *actual* sequence of events in the archives, how credible is Owen 
DeLong’s opposition to the review proposal and call for its withdrawal?

On a broader note, how do we process such contributions in general in the 
PDP, from Owen or anyone else, now and in the future, if we cannot trust 
their motivation?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20181218/3b55c533/attachment.html>

More information about the Community-Discuss mailing list