[Community-Discuss] Share About Cloud Innovation Ltd and their business

Anthony Ubah ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com
Tue Jul 27 11:45:35 UTC 2021

Didin't comms at afrinic.net already close this thread?

Here's another bait email trolling the community.

*Best Regards,*

*Anthony*


On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 5:45 AM Lili Au <au8692936 at gmail.com> wrote:


> A funny discussion. Anyway, I saw many LOA that is CI authorise LARUS ( a

> Hong Kong company too) then LARUS authorise to their clients. Leo is

> correct.

>

> —

>

> > Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz>於2021年7月27日 15:32寫道：

> >

> > Hi,

> >

> > did any of those make any commitment like "we are using these to connect

> > our customers in Africa" ?

> >

> > Did CI?

> >

> > Thanks,

> > Frank

> >

> > PS: I count connectivity to a VM hosted by CI as ok, but not leasing

> > just the IP to an entity without providing them any connectivity.

> >

> >> On 27/07/2021 08:24, Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss wrote:

> >> If you think this is a shocking amount of address space, please consider

> >> the amount of space

> >> held by:

> >>

> >> Non-LIRs (end users):

> >> Hewlett Packard

> >> Apple Computer

> >>

> >> Unclear whether to classify as LIR or not:

> >> Amateur Radio (AMPR)

> >>

> >> LIRs:

> >> XFINITY/Comcast

> >> Verizon

> >> Akamai

> >> XO Communications

> >> Amazon

> >> Microsoft

> >> Google

> >> etc.

> >>

> >> The equivalent of 1.5 /10s (75% of a /9) is far less than any of the

> >> above organizations.

> >>

> >> Owen

> >>

> >>

> >>> On Jul 26, 2021, at 01:11 , Leo S <leoso at afcast.com

> >>> <mailto:leoso at afcast.com>> wrote:

> >>>

> >>> Hi Ronald

> >>> Maybe your number is correct, whether it is 6.3M or 7M,This is a

> >>> shocking number for everyone especially in 201x such a large block

> >>> allocated. This is not in 199x year.

> >>>

> >>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 4:25 AM Ronald F. Guilmette

> >>> <rfg at tristatelogic.com <mailto:rfg at tristatelogic.com>> wrote:

> >>>

> >>> In message

> >>> <CALm9Cbn+R9oen9+9YBjfbK5gGTcmEmZ1yhxgDfw04OTC3MxeZg at mail.gmail.com

> <mailto:

> CALm9Cbn%2BR9oen9%2B9YBjfbK5gGTcmEmZ1yhxgDfw04OTC3MxeZg at mail.gmail.com>>

> >>> Meriem Dayday <meriemdayday at gmail.com

> >>> <mailto:meriemdayday at gmail.com>> wrote:

> >>>

> >>>> This is a direct violation of the CoC.

> >>>

> >>> No, actually, it isn't.

> >>>

> >>> The information about how Cloud Innovation is presently making use

> of

> >>> it's assigned 6,291,456 AFRINIC-administered IPv4 addresses is

> >>> effectively

> >>> public information, and it is not difficult to derive from any

> >>> number of

> >>> public sources (e.g. RIPEStat, bgp.he.net <http://bgp.he.net/>,

> etc.)

> >>>

> >>> If you lived in the time of Galileo Galilei, would you consider it

> an

> >>> affront to public decency if some people elected to look through the

> >>> telescope and then just describe what they saw? And if so, then

> what

> >>> is next? Book burning?

> >>>

> >>>> Disclosing such information and data without the company's

> >>> consent is a

> >>>> clear attempt of defamation and can have legal consequences on the

> >>>> concerned person.

> >>>

> >>> OK, let's parse that statement, because it conjoins two different

> >>> obvious

> >>> logical problems.

> >>>

> >>> First, the Internet is *not* a private network. Fact's about what

> >>> various

> >>> companies are doing on the Internet are possible to see, and to

> learn,

> >>> without needing the consent of the companies inolved. That is the

> >>> nature

> >>> of the Internet. If you want to run your own closed private

> intranet,

> >>> then go head. Nobody will stop you and you can then keep every last

> >>> detail of your corporate operations utterly secret. But the

> >>> minute any

> >>> company obtains Internet number resources and starts using those, it

> >>> *voluntarily* gives up some of its corporate secrecy in exchange

> >>> for being

> >>> a part of, and a participant on this great communications

> >>> experiment we

> >>> call the Internet.

> >>>

> >>> I personally am not now, and never have been a customer of Cloud

> >>> Innovation.

> >>> And yet even well before today I already determined for myself

> >>> that well

> >>> more that 90% of Cloud Innovation's assigned AFRINIC-administered

> IPv4

> >>> address space was being deployed to other continents. This is not

> >>> a state

> >>> secret by any means, and the information may be derived from 100%

> >>> public

> >>> sources. Anyone clever enough to seek it out will find the same

> >>> information.

> >>>

> >>> Whether the manner in which Cloud Innovation is using/deploying its

> >>> assigned number resources does or does not comport with its specific

> >>> RSA and/or with community approved regulations is a separate

> question,

> >>> and one which I myself do not have an answer to. In any case, the

> >>> courts will sort out those questions in due course, I imagine.

> >>> But the

> >>> mere facts of how Cloud Innovation has deployed its AFRINIC-assigned

> >>> resources, or how it would appear to make money, based on the

> >>> available

> >>> public evidence, are *not* corporate secrets. Any attempt to

> portray

> >>> them as such is just an attempt at heavy-handed censorship.

> >>>

> >>> The second logical problem with the statement above is contained

> >>> in the

> >>> part that says "... attempt of defamation and can have legal

> >>> consequences

> >>> on the concerned person."

> >>>

> >>> Exactly so! If the guy who posted the material you are reacting

> >>> to was

> >>> willing to take the legal risk to post that material, IN SPITE OF

> the

> >>> possibility that he could, at least in theory, be sued for

> defamation,

> >>> then why are YOU worried about it? Why should AFRINIC be worried

> >>> about

> >>> it? Obviously, this (theoretical) possibility of a defemation

> lawsuit

> >>> is only a problem for the guy who posted the (allegedly) defamatory

> >>> text, and he obviiously was willing to take the risk in order to

> >>> express

> >>> his opinion, SO WHAT IS THAT TO YOU?

> >>>

> >>> Here again, shouting down in the original poster in this manner

> >>> appears

> >>> to me to be just another a heavy-handed attempt at pointless

> >>> censorship.

> >>>

> >>> I hope that we here can all have open and frank discusions of all

> >>> of the

> >>> issues now of concern to AFRINIC without these kinds of attempts to

> >>> muzzle dissenting viewpoints based on perfectly silly arguments.

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> Regards,

> >>> rfg

> >>>

> >>> _______________________________________________

> >>> Community-Discuss mailing list

> >>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net

> >

> >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

> >>> <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>

> >>>

> >>> _______________________________________________

> >>> Community-Discuss mailing list

> >>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net <mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>

> >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

> >>

> >>

> >> _______________________________________________

> >> Community-Discuss mailing list

> >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net

> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

> >>

> >

> > _______________________________________________

> > Community-Discuss mailing list

> > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net

> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

>

> _______________________________________________

> Community-Discuss mailing list

> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210727/9aa40ed9/attachment.html>

More information about the Community-Discuss mailing list