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

Ronald F. Guilmette rfg at tristatelogic.com
Thu Jul 29 07:55:22 UTC 2021

In message <AECA8F17-4F79-422E-9FBD-12E6FF3675E8 at delong.com>,
Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

>Cloud Innovation submitted correct and valid justifications under policy which

>were reviewed not only by staff, but also by the AFRINIC board. The board

>elected {to} have the addresses issued after deliberating the matter. Yes, as

>is the case with any other resource member, that justification remains


OK. I'll bite. Why? Why should a set of justifications for large IP
space blocks that were submitted 7 or 8 years ago still be in any way
"confidential" *today* and here in 2021?

Haven't you told us, repeatedly, that yes, Cloud Innovation's IP space is
nowadays being used in entirely different manner and for entirely different
purposes than it was when it was all first granted? If not then why did
you yourself assert that the -original- IP space justifications are "no
longer relevant"?

If the space is all being used in a totally different way now than how it was
originally being used back in 2013 and 2014... which seems to be just about
the only fact that both Cloud Innovation and AFRINIC agree on... then what's
the big secret? Why not just show us the original justifications? That
original justification documentation is utterly irrelevant to Cloud
Innovation's *current* business and to Cloud Innovation's *current* business
model, so where is the harm in just showing us that stale, old, and
"irrelevant" stuff?

>> The only scrap of information that has, so far, been made pubic about that

>> decision process is that the decision(s) to grant Cloud Innovation two

>> /11 blocks and two /12 blocks were NOT made by the Board at the time,

>> but rather by "staff". (Well, anyway, there were some public mailing

>> list messages to that effect at the time.)


>Whether the ultimate decision was made by staff or by the board, certainly the

>board reviewed and weighed in on at least the last two to the best of my


So the Board at the time DID NOT weight in on the first two allocations
that Cloud Innovation got, correct? That decision was made strictly and
only by "staff", yes? (Again, there were claims made to that effect...
PUBLIC claims... back at the time, i.e. that the allocation decisions
had been made by "staff" and -not- reviewed by the board. I will try to
find the links for you if you doubt it. I think that I saved those in
one of my investigation files.)

Remind me please... Who was the ultimate head of "staff" at the time?
I'm talking about 2013 and 2014. My memory seems to be failing me.


More information about the Community-Discuss mailing list