[Community-Discuss] Blog: A Comprehensive audit of the AFRINIC WHOIS Database
sfolayan at gmail.com
Fri Feb 12 13:42:27 UTC 2021
I will not want your good work eroded with your persistent use of the
Please see some comments herein:
On 2/11/21 2:18 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> In message <ef77e9a3-16f6-f7b8-5418-e11acbee9931 at gmail.com>,
> Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at gmail.com> wrote:
>> There is an hierarchy regarding the legacy space:
>> 1. Legacy Space as a whole
>> 2. Idle Legacy Space [There are indeed legacy spaces in use, and not idle]
>> 3. Hijacked and now recovered Idle legacy Space. [There are some legacy
>> spaces that can never be reclaimed by their initial allotees, probably
>> because they are out of business, and there is no successor organization]
> That last part is simply incorrect. There is no such thing as an abandoned
> legacy block in the AFRINIC region for which the legitimate owner, or
> the legitimate successor in interest cannot be definitively determined.
That there is no abandoned legacy block in the AfriNIC region, does not
mean that the statement is not correct. Valid cases may just be 0, that
is still Ok.
> I meant to mention this fact earlier, since this relates quite directly
> to two glaringly erroneous statements that appear on page 4 of the
> recently published AFRINIC WHOIS Audit Reoport Overview. The two
> provably erroneous statements contained on page 4 of that Overview are
> as follows:
> 2. Holders of the resources may also be defunct
> 9. Some holders of legacy resources appeared to have undergone a
> change of name so that it is no longer practicable to trace down
> the concerned organisations;
> I wish that AFRINIC management and/or the AFRINC Board had had the good
> sense to consult with either myself or with Jan Vermeulen before they
> elected to incorporate the above erroneous assertions into the Overview
> of the Audit Report.
Why should AFRINIC consult with you, beyond the whistles you have
already blown and what is published?
Doesn't that suggest that you want to trade some of these information? I
Why should you be trusted, above any other person including those who
may make a claim to *any* of the blocks?
> In point of fact, my detailed and extensive investigations into the histories
> of every single one of the stolen legacy blocks have persuaded me, based
> on clear evidence in each case, that there are -zero- such blocks under
> the authority of AFRINIC where the original registration organizations
> are "defunct" in the sense of being both dissolved AND having no legitimate
> and lawful successor in interest.
... and those successors are still into operating real Networks, and not
pivoted into journalism or Tourism?
Their words, your words, anybody's words. What do we believe?
> In a similar vein, it is just plain wrong to assert that it is "no longer
> practicable to trace down the" legal successors in interest for *any*
> AFRINIC legacy block registrant. I can state this categorically and
> without reservation because I myself spent countless hours researching
> the history and the historical evolution of each AFRINIC legacy IPv4
> address block, and the ownership thereof, for each legacy block that I
> and Jan Vermeulen have called attention to. (And in fact I have had
> personal phone conversations with all or nearly all of the legitimate
> current block owners for all these blocks.)
Should they not be the ones coming forward and laying as much claims as
they can, including having their lawyers chase the squatters and the
thieves all round the 4 corners of the globe?
> In literally 100% of these cases, it HAS been possible to deduce, based
> on public historical evidence, the legitimate successor in interest for
> each and every one of the original registrant organizations. Furthermore,
> I have maintained detailed records which document my historical research
> into the chain of legal inheritance for each and every one of these blocks,
> and I have always been ready, willing, and able to submit this abundant
> documentation to AFRINIC managament, when and if it was ever requested.
> It never has been.
I just do not get the reason why AFRINIC should be after the rightful
owners of legacy blocks that are not within its administrative and or
I also do not see why AFRINIC must come to ask you, before you make such
information available, granted that your pursuit is altruistic in the
What am I missing here?
> In short, as we all now know, AFRINC failed, during a period extending
> across many years, to fulfill its obligations to act as a responsible
> shepard of the IP addresses that history placed into the organization's
> care. AFRINIC allowed quite a lot of these IP addresses to be stolen,
> right from under the noses of the entire staff and the CEO at the time.
> AFRINIC has now compounded that original error with another one, i.e. an
> apparent utter failure and/or unwillingness to do the kind of open source
> historical research that I have already done, and that would allow each
> and every stolen legacy block to now be returned to its lawful and
> rightful owners, each of which CAN BE DEFINITIVELY DETERMINED, contrary
> to the false assertions made in the Audit Report Overview.
> Personally, I find this level of laziness and this kind of shirking of
> responsibility, on the part of AFRINIC, inexcusable. The truth is out
> there, if they would only expend the effort, as I have, to look for it.
> This secondary failure of the organization to act lawfully, and as a
> responsible shepard of the IP space, is all the more galling to me
> personally because I have already done all of the research needed to
> establish the current rightful ownership of each block beyond a reasonable
> doubt, and all AFRINIC management had to do was to ask me for that research
> and I would have sent it all to them, along with my copious notes. I was
> never asked.
Kindly publish a minority report.
1. add to the body of facts available,
2. obviously help outline the points where AFRINIC failed.
3. Clarify your motives to a number of us.
More information about the Community-Discuss