From ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com  Tue Jun  1 01:47:29 2021
From: ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com (Anthony Ubah)
Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 21:47:29 -0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [zanog-discuss] Fwd: [members-discuss]
 Unsolicited Requests
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWaXL3a-Lqdg_RJDrhzh48rZe_wP-S_VZJsC=a7UZ4XYRw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <JN1P275MB0613B7F7409751551EB981D080229@JN1P275MB0613.ZAFP275.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
 <222c54fc-3707-13cb-4736-3f780a1cddc3@seacom.com>
 <D492A07F-F7C7-4611-8C24-D070634E7DF3@consulintel.es>
 <CAEqgTWZmETt0NGXHZktJRC_KXhJpCP_XQ3_Qss1oSjLr0x=RYQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANanHizU=A6ob4GVTX-LrULVm43zu_ayWugWO49m8z+cKg=XcQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEqgTWaXL3a-Lqdg_RJDrhzh48rZe_wP-S_VZJsC=a7UZ4XYRw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHcb0AT_GQ0bkemEQty=ijetT0ZOu9=EpHcW9LDF_TSun-65Mw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Noah,

In line with your reasons, I submit that no one can be a Board member.
Because we aren't Robinson Crusoe, I guarantee you that everyone is
mutually affiliated to thw other..
Thus, if you are convinced that everyone linked to a resource member
presents a conflict of interest, then nobody is qualified to run for a seat
as Board member.
As every potential or past Board member must have some ties with resource
members.

Consequently, it is wrong to assume that anyone running for Board must have
nothing to do with resource members.

Moreover, AFRINIC policies are clear, and the Board election is democratic.

Like I said in my previous post, it isn't illogical for interested
candidates to running some sort of campaigns. And making themselves and the
ideas the bring to the table should FIRST be seen simply as an awareness
move to inform voters' decision, rather than alleging fraud.

While I completely disagree with the use of incentives to sway votes, I
reiterate that the onus is on the Voters to vote in the interest of AFRINIC
with utmost integrity



Kind regards,

Anthony

On Mon, May 31, 2021, 10:21 AM Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, 30 May 2021, 00:51 Ibeanusi Elvis, <ibeanusielvis at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Noah,
>>
>
> Chef Elvis,
>
> See response in line.
>
>
>> Although the promise of financial benefits makes it smell of malfunction,
>> fault and corruption and AFRINIC does not support such but promoting or
>> suggesting a candidate should be not considered immoral.
>>
>
> The candidate in question has a campaign team purporting to be from
> Afrinic elections and is calling Afrinic members all the way from HongKong,
> asking members  to vote and provide confirmation after voting for your
> candidate based on all the WhatsApp screenshot messages that members have
> shared across different mailing lists.
>
> It is also public information that Paul Wolner's company [1] originates
> significant millions of IPv4 address space allocated to Cloud Innovation
> Ltd [2].
>
> See the links below and this is an indication of direct business
> relationship and therefore a direct conflict of interest.
>
> [1]  https://bgp.he.net/AS328608#_whois
>
> [2] https://bgp.he.net/AS328608#_prefixes
>
>
>
>> Finally, the idea of suggesting to disqualify the candidate in question
>> is entirely out of proportion, unacceptable and should not even be in
>> consideration.
>>
>
> Except that the candidate presents a direct conflict of interest.
>
> PS: To paraphrase, honest Abe,  ?*You can fool some of the people all of
> the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all
> of the people all of the time*.?
>
> Cheers,
> Noah
>
> Excuse My English :-)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210531/12a13c59/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Tue Jun  1 04:06:32 2021
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2021 07:06:32 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [zanog-discuss] Fwd: [members-discuss]
 Unsolicited Requests
In-Reply-To: <CAHcb0AT_GQ0bkemEQty=ijetT0ZOu9=EpHcW9LDF_TSun-65Mw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <JN1P275MB0613B7F7409751551EB981D080229@JN1P275MB0613.ZAFP275.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
 <222c54fc-3707-13cb-4736-3f780a1cddc3@seacom.com>
 <D492A07F-F7C7-4611-8C24-D070634E7DF3@consulintel.es>
 <CAEqgTWZmETt0NGXHZktJRC_KXhJpCP_XQ3_Qss1oSjLr0x=RYQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANanHizU=A6ob4GVTX-LrULVm43zu_ayWugWO49m8z+cKg=XcQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEqgTWaXL3a-Lqdg_RJDrhzh48rZe_wP-S_VZJsC=a7UZ4XYRw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHcb0AT_GQ0bkemEQty=ijetT0ZOu9=EpHcW9LDF_TSun-65Mw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWZgYweiAgnvDOyvq_ApphXxrhTu2s3SDx9UB-xZGkNzKg@mail.gmail.com>

Oga Ubah

On Tue, 1 Jun 2021, 04:47 Anthony Ubah, <ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Noah,
>
> Thus, if you are convinced that everyone linked to a resource member
> presents a conflict of interest, then nobody is qualified to run for a seat
> as Board member.
>


Paul Wolner's company "Africa on Cloud" is a business associate of "Cloud
Innovation Limited" which is in court asking for 1.8 billion from AFRINIC.

What say you?


As every potential or past Board member must have some ties with resource
> members.
>

Except that the current and past board members and their affiliations where
not in Mauritian courts lodging injunctions and suing AFRINIC.

Do you spot the difference?

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210601/2866e9f0/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Tue Jun  1 04:17:26 2021
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2021 07:17:26 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: [members-discuss] Unsolicited Requests
In-Reply-To: <36778.1622504986@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
References: <CAEqgTWb0=33NGRQKFxMTmwfua9+arSB6vMKZtGL80NSkr1Qabg@mail.gmail.com>
 <36778.1622504986@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWYex0UYARb_mW9LPZ=Xe5ge2vp4UDUVk8BGbiN45z8qVA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 1 Jun 2021, 02:49 Ronald F. Guilmette, <rfg at tristatelogic.com>
wrote:

> In message <CAEqgTWb0=
> 33NGRQKFxMTmwfua9+arSB6vMKZtGL80NSkr1Qabg at mail.gmail.com>,
> Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
>
> >RFG,
> >
> >FYI, there was one such post on AfNOG list.
> >
> >https://afnog.org/pipermail/afnog/2021-May/004142.html
>
> Did you even LOOK at the link you just referred me to?
>
> All I see is that there is one guy who is claiming, without
> evidence, that he was offered money... he doesn't even say
> how much...


Ping him directly FYI.

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210601/f689add3/attachment.html>

From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Tue Jun  1 06:03:29 2021
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 23:03:29 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: [members-discuss] Unsolicited Requests
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWYex0UYARb_mW9LPZ=Xe5ge2vp4UDUVk8BGbiN45z8qVA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <37784.1622527409@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <CAEqgTWYex0UYARb_mW9LPZ=Xe5ge2vp4UDUVk8BGbiN45z8qVA at mail.gmail.com>
Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:

>> All I see is that there is one guy who is claiming, without
>> evidence, that he was offered money... he doesn't even say
>> how much...
>
>Ping him directly FYI.

OK, so someone has been kind enough to point me at these three specific
links which are screenshots, apparently from some phone:

https://afnog.org/pipermail/afnog/attachments/20210528/243a6777/attachment-0003.jpg
https://afnog.org/pipermail/afnog/attachments/20210528/243a6777/attachment-0004.jpg
https://afnog.org/pipermail/afnog/attachments/20210528/243a6777/attachment-0005.jpg

This is at least helpful for those of us trying to get some context on
the present controversy.

What I still don't see here is either (a) any offer of money for votes
or even (b) any obvious "spamming" as I would define that term.

These look like personalized messages... NOT machine generated messages.

If that's accurate, then these messages do not qualify as "spam" per se.
They may be rude.  They may be unsolicited.  They may be unwanted by the
recipients, but none of those factors in isolation make the messages
"spam".

Spam is largely or entirely duplicative, and essentially always machine
generated.


Regards,
rfg



From mark.tinka at seacom.com  Tue Jun  1 12:54:11 2021
From: mark.tinka at seacom.com (Mark Tinka)
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2021 14:54:11 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: [members-discuss] Unsolicited Requests
In-Reply-To: <37784.1622527409@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
References: <37784.1622527409@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
Message-ID: <b1e3b7a0-a138-f95c-4531-23732157ddbb@seacom.com>



On 6/1/21 08:03, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:

> Spam is largely or entirely duplicative, and essentially always machine
> generated.

I disagree.

Spam is spam, regardless of whether it was human- or machine-generated.

Mark.



From hrobert at africacert.org  Wed Jun  9 03:41:43 2021
From: hrobert at africacert.org (Jean-Robert Hountomey)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2021 23:41:43 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Community-Discuss] UNOEWG and GGE Reports
Message-ID: <1623210103.64429161@apps.rackspace.com>


 

Dear Colleagues,

The UN General Assembly established through resolution 73/27 an Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG), on developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security in which all UN Member States were invited to participate. On 12 March 2021, the Open-ended Working Group adopted conclusions and recommendations, including actions and cooperative measures to address ICT threats and to promote an open, secure, stable, accessible, and peaceful ICT environment. Check here for more information: [ https://front.un-arm.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Final-report-A-AC.290-2021-CRP.2.pdf ]( https://front.un-arm.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Final-report-A-AC.290-2021-CRP.2.pdf )

In addition, in GA resolution 73/266, the Secretary-General was requested to establish a Group of Governmental Experts on Advancing responsible State behavior in cyberspace in the context of international security. On 28 May 2021, the Group of Governmental Experts which comprises experts from 25 States working in their personal capacity adopted a report on Advancing responsible State behavior in cyberspace in the context of international security.
 
More information at: [ https://www.un.org/disarmament/group-of-governmental-experts/ ]( https://www.un.org/disarmament/group-of-governmental-experts/ )
 
Regards.
 
Jean-Robert
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210608/6e664246/attachment.html>

From amelnaud at gmail.com  Mon Jun 21 10:13:17 2021
From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2021 10:13:17 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] New article shared after Afrinic-33 by Alain
Message-ID: <CAGDMR_d0pUiecAv8PM=0-_amDK6HOF5fpbzDY4GOeTVmBTRKyA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear communities,

Find bellow a link to the new article shared by one of our famous elders
Alain P. AINA, on our last AIS-21 feedback, in order to have a good and
professional view from an experienced and knowledgeable person, who has
good memories of all Afrinic's PPM sessions and other organizations of
Internet Ecosystems in the world and particularly in Africa.


Hope this can help some newcomers to have the best view of our
organizations and communities.


https://www.linkedin.com/posts/alain-aina-1060266_internetgovernance-afrinic-ipaddress-activity-6812650721851379712-VasE


Regards

--
Arnaud
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210621/e86d42f3/attachment.html>

From eddy at afrinic.net  Wed Jun 23 12:22:41 2021
From: eddy at afrinic.net (Eddy Kayihura)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 16:22:41 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Afrinic Updates June 2021
References: <468AD7AF-8DB1-4890-BF3B-FB6728EB8F62@afrinic.net>
Message-ID: <6B6D155D-0D98-4588-BC54-57175AB62B6E@afrinic.net>

Dear Colleagues,

It is my hope that you are keeping safe, I share below some updates on AFRINIC activities for the month of June 2021.

AIS?21 Online Highlights
It was the second time that we were having the meeting online and this time, we had a lot of improvements which were mostly lessons learned from AIS?20. This year's meeting hosted  378 unique delegates from 55 countries, 7 sponsors and was virtually hosted by Internet Service Providers in DRC (ISPA-DRC). Here are a few of my Personal Highlights of AIS?21.

The Inclusivity and diversity session had a panel discussing aspects of digital inclusion in the African Ecosystem and the importance of thawing technology and gender to work hand in hand in the educational sector through mentorship and knowledge sharing. 
The first two days of the meeting were dedicated to  AfNOG and AF* Days. The  AIS?21 Online opening ceremony was flagged off by His Excellency Augustin Kibassa, Minister of Posts, Telecommunications & ICT in the Democratic Republic of Congo, he highlighted the production and supply of digital services and related activities that are developing rapidly in Africa through the participation of public administrations, the private sector and civil societies. 
The ?Building Digital Economy in Africa? session called on the need for investment in infrastructure development and building networks across Africa with emphasis on the importance of public-private partnership where governments facilitate collaborations and are the enabler on matters legislations, connectivity, entrepreneurship and data protection.
It is worth noting that during the AGMM session, privacy concerns were raised, and we managed to quickly resolve what we could during the meeting. However, we have taken note of such concerns and we will be organising webinars around how AFRINIC deals with data privacy to share and discuss best current practices.

I would like to thank our virtual host ISPA-DRC, our partners: AfNOG,the AF* and AIS?21  Online Sponsors for your immense support. Thank you to all event speakers  and  delegates for the rich presentations and conversations that enriched this meeting. The AIS? 21 Online  meeting recaps are available here <https://2021.internetsummit.africa/daily-recap>.



AFRINIC Online Course - Arabic version

We recently launched the ?Creating the perfect IPv6 addressing plan? online course in Arabic.The course that is available in English and French, helps you create the best possible hierarchical addressing and facilitate the aggregation of your resources. The course has been developed and is offered by the AFRINIC Academy. I would like to appreciate our community members: Ms.Sara Alamin, Ms.Khansa Abdalla and Mr. Manhal Mohamed for their support in translating the course. 

Lame Delegation Policy implemented in its entirety
 
AFRINIC went live with the full implementation of the Lame Delegation Policy (section 10.7 of the Consolidated Policy Manual) on 29 April 2021 and since then, DNS lameness tests run daily from at least 3 geographical locations. When an ?nserver? record on a ?domain? object  is found to be lame on consecutive days, notifications are sent on days 3, 10, 17 and 24 to admin-c, tech-c and zone-c contacts, while on day 11 a remark is added in the "domain" object identifying the lame nameserver(s). On day 30, the lame ?nserver? record will be removed from the WHOIS database. Following the removal of all lame ?nserver? records, if a ?domain? object is left with zero ?nserver? records, the ?domain? object will be removed from the WHOIS database. As per the Policy, this measure ensures that nameservers as recorded in the WHOIS are in fact authoritative for the relevant zones, making the WHOIS a reliable source of information for network operators.
More information on this change, advice and contact details for inquiries may be obtained on this online publication>> https://afrinic.net/20210428-lame-dns-delegation-policy <https://afrinic.net/20210428-lame-dns-delegation-policy> . A tool  for reports on lame delegations per domain is available at >> https://afrinic.net/whois/lame <https://afrinic.net/whois/lame>
I wish you well as we pursue our common goals and aspirations.


Kind Regards,

Eddy Kayihura
Chief Executive Officer,
African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC)
ceo at afrinic.net <mailto:ceo at afrinic.net> 

????????????????????????????????.

Chers coll?gues,

En esp?rant que vous vous portez bien, je partage ci-dessous quelques mises ? jour sur les activit?s d'AFRINIC pour le mois de juin 2021.

Faits marquants de l'AIS'21 en ligne

C'?tait la deuxi?me fois que nous organisions la r?union en ligne et cette fois-ci, nous avons apport? de nombreuses am?liorations qui ?taient principalement des le?ons tir?es de l'AIS'20. La r?union de cette ann?e a accueilli 378 d?l?gu?s uniques de 55 pays, 7 sponsors et a ?t? virtuellement accueillie par l?Internet Service Provider Association en RDC (ISPA-RDC). Voici quelques-uns de mes points forts de l'AIS'21.

La session sur l'inclusion et la diversit? a vu un panel discuter des aspects de l'inclusion num?rique dans l'?cosyst?me africain et de l'importance de rapprocher la technologie et l'?galit? des sexes pour travailler main dans la main dans le secteur de l'?ducation ? travers le mentorat et du partage des connaissances.

Les deux premiers jours de la r?union ont ?t? consacr?s aux journ?es AfNOG et AF*. La c?r?monie d'ouverture de l'AIS'21 Online a ?t? inaugur?e par Son Excellence Augustin Kibassa, ministre des Postes, des T?l?communications et des TIC de la R?publique d?mocratique du Congo. Il a soulign? la n?cessit? de produire et de fournir des services num?riques et des activit?s connexes qui se d?veloppent rapidement en Afrique gr?ce ? la participation des administrations publiques, du secteur priv? et des soci?t?s civiles.

La session "Building Digital Economy in Africa" qui a appel? ? la n?cessit? d'investir dans le d?veloppement des infrastructures et la construction de r?seaux ? travers l'Afrique en mettant l'accent sur l'importance du partenariat public-priv? o? les gouvernements facilitent les collaborations et sont les catalyseurs sur les questions de l?gislation, de connectivit?, d'entrepreneuriat et de protection des donn?es.

Il convient de noter qu'au cours de la session de l'AGMM, des probl?mes de confidentialit? ont ?t? soulev?s, et nous avons r?ussi ? r?soudre rapidement ce que nous pouvions pendant la r?union. Cependant, nous avons pris note de ces pr?occupations et nous organiserons des webinaires sur la fa?on dont AFRINIC traite la confidentialit? des donn?es pour partager et discuter des meilleures pratiques actuelles.

Je tiens ? remercier notre h?te virtuel ISPA-DRC, nos partenaires : AfNOG, l'AF* et les sponsors en ligne d'AIS'21 pour leur immense soutien. Merci ? tous les intervenants et d?l?gu?s de l'?v?nement pour les nombreuses pr?sentations et conversations qui ont enrichi cette r?union. Les r?caps de la r?union AIS'21 Online sont disponibles ici <https://2021.internetsummit.africa/daily-recap>.

Cours en ligne AFRINIC - version arabe

Nous avons r?cemment lanc? le cours en ligne "Cr?er le plan d'adressage IPv6 parfait" en arabe. Le cours, qui est disponible en anglais et en fran?ais, vous aide ? cr?er le meilleur adressage hi?rarchique possible et ? faciliter l'agr?gation de vos ressources. Le cours a ?t? d?velopp? et est propos? par l'Acad?mie AFRINIC. Je tiens ? remercier les membres de notre communaut? : Mme Sara Alamin, Mme Khansa Abdalla et M. Manhal Mohamed pour leur soutien dans la traduction du cours.

Impl?mentation de la politique de 'Lame delegation' dans son int?gralit?
 
AFRINIC a impl?ment? l'int?gralit? de la politique de 'Lame delegation' (section 10.7 du CPM) le 29 avril 2021 et depuis, des tests de 'lameness' DNS' sont effectu?s quotidiennement ? partir d'au moins 3 emplacements g?ographiques diff?rents.  Lorsqu?un serveur autoritaire renseign? comme ?nserver? pour un objet ?domain? se r?v?le ?lame? pendant plusieurs jours cons?cutifs, des notifications sont envoy?es les jours 3, 10, 17 et 24 aux contacts admin-c, tech-c et zone-c, tandis que le jour 11, une remarque est ajout?e dans l'objet "domain" pour identifier le ou les serveurs de noms 'lame'. Au cours du 30e jour, l?enregistrement ?nserver? correspondant au serveur autoritaire d?faillant est supprim? de la base de donn?es WHOIS d'AFRINIC. Apr?s la suppression de tous les attributs "nserver" d?fectueux, si un objet "domain" ne comporte aucun enregistrement "nserver", l'objet "domain" sera supprim? de la base de donn?es WHOIS d'AFRINIC. Conform?ment ? la politique, cette mesure garantit que les serveurs de noms enregistr?s dans le WHOIS font effectivement autorit? pour les zones concern?es, ce qui fait du WHOIS une source d'information fiable pour les op?rateurs de r?seaux.
12:27 <https://afrinic.slack.com/archives/DU0BAQ7ST/p1624436841008300>
Pour de plus amples informations sur ce changement, des conseils ou tout autres requ?tes sont disponibles via ce lien >> https://afrinic.net/20210428-lame-dns-delegation-policy <https://afrinic.net/20210428-lame-dns-delegation-policy> . Notre outil permettant d'?tablir des rapports sur les d?l?gations ?lame? par domain est disponible ? l'adresse suivante >> https://afrinic.net/whois/lame <https://afrinic.net/whois/lame>.

Je vous souhaite bonne chance dans la poursuite de nos objectifs et aspirations communs.


Sinc?res salutations,

Eddy Kayihura
Directeur g?n?ral,
African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC)
ceo at afrinic.net <mailto:ceo at afrinic.net>
????????..

?????? ????????

??? ?? ??? ????? ? ????? ????? ??? ????????? ??? ????? AFRINIC ???? ????? 2021.

???? ??????? ??? ???????? ?? AIS?21
???? ??? ?? ????? ??????? ???? ???? ???? ???????? ??? ???????? ???? ????? ? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ????????? ???? ???? ?? ?????? ?????? ??????? ?? AIS?20. ?????? ?????? ??? ????? 378 ??????? ?????? ?? 55 ???? ? 7 ???? ????????? ?????? ????? ????? ???????? ?? ??????? ??????? ??????????? (ISPA-DRC). ???? ??? ??? ??????? ??????? ?????? ?? ?? AIS?21.

??? ????? ???????? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ?? ?????? ?????????? ???????? ?????? ????????? ????? ?????? ?????? ????????? ????? ????? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ???????? ?? ???? ??????? ??????? ???????.
?? ????? ??????? ??????? ?? ???????? ????? AfNOG ? AF *. ?? ??????? ?? ??? ?????? AIS'21 ??? ???????? ?? ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ? ???? ?????? ?????????? ?????????? ????????? ?????????? ?? ??????? ??????? ??????????? ? ??? ??? ????? ??? ????? ?????? ??????? ??????? ???????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ????? ?? ??????? ?? ???? ?????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ????? ???????? ??????.
???? "???? ???????? ?????? ?? ???????" ???? ??? ??? ?????? ??? ????????? ?? ????? ?????? ??????? ????? ??????? ?? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ??????? ??? ????? ??????? ??? ???????? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ???????? ??????? ????? ?????? ???????? ?? ??????? ????????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ? ????? ????????.
?? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? AGMM ? ????? ????? ???? ???????? ??? ???? ????? ?? ????????. ??? ??? ? ??? ?????? ??? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ???????? ??? ???????? ??????? ??????? ???? ????????? ???????.
??? ?? ???? ?????? ????????? ISPA-DRC ????????: AfNOG ? AF * ? AIS?21 ??? ???????? ?????? ??????. ????? ????? ????????? ?? ????? ?????????? ??? ?????? ????????? ?????? ?????????? ???? ???? ??? ????????. ???? ???????? ?????? ???????? ??? ???????? ?? AIS ???? ???.



???? AFRINIC ??? ???? - ?????? ???????
?????? ?????? ?????? ????????? ??? ???????? "????? ??? ????? IPv6 ??????" ?????? ???????. ?????? ????????? ???????? ???????? ?????????? ????????? ? ?????? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ??????. ?? ????? ?????? ???????? ?? ??? ???????? AFRINIC. ??? ?? ???? ????? ???????: ?????? ???? ?????? ? ??????? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ?? ????? ??????.
?? ????? ????? ??????? ??????? ?? ??????
 
???? AFRINIC ???????? ?????? ?????? ??????? ??????? (????? 10.7 ?? ???? ??????? ???????) ?? 29 ????? 2021 ???? ??? ????? ? ??? ????? ???????? ??? DNS ?????? ?? 3 ????? ??????? ??? ?????. ????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? "nserver" ??? ???? "??????" ?????? ?? ???? ??????? ? ??? ????? ????????? ?? ?????? 3 ? 10 ? 17 ? 24 ??? ???? ????? admin-c ? tech-c ? zone-c ? ????? ?????? 11 ??? ????? ?????? ?? ???? "??????" ?????? ???? (?????) ??????? ???????. ?? ????? ???????? ? ???? ????? ??? "nserver" ??????? ?? ????? ?????? WHOIS. ??? ????? ???? ????? "nserver" ??????? ? ??? ?? ??? ???? "domain" ???? ????? "nserver" ? ????? ????? ???? "domain" ?? ????? ?????? WHOIS. ????? ??????? ? ???? ??? ??????? ?? ????? ??????? ??? ?? ???? ?? WHOIS ?? ?? ?????? ?????? ??????? ??? ????? ? ??? ???? WHOIS ?????? ??????? ????????? ?????? ???????.
???? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ????????? ??? ??? ??????? ???????? ??????? ??????? ??????????? ?? ??? ??????? ??? ???????? >> https://afrinic.net/20210428-lame-dns-delegation-policy. ????? ???? ???????? ??? ????????? ??????? ??? ???? ??? >> https://afrinic.net/whois/lame

????? ??? ?? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ??????? ????????? ????????.


???? ????????

???? ????????
?????? ?????????
?????? ???????? ???????? ?????? (AFRINIC)
ceo at afrinic.net

???????????????????

Caros Colegas,

? minha esperan?a que se mantenham seguros, partilho abaixo algumas actualiza??es sobre as actividades AFRINIC para o m?s de Junho de 2021.


Destaques da AIS'21 Online
Era a segunda vez que t?nhamos a reuni?o online e, desta vez, tivemos muitas melhorias que foram, na sua maioria, li??es aprendidas com o AIS'20. A reuni?o deste ano acolheu 378 delegados ?nicos de 55 pa?ses,7 patrocinadores e foi virtualmente acolhida por Provedores de Servi?os de Internet na RDC (ISPA-DRC). Aqui est?o alguns dos meus Destaques Pessoais da AIS'21.

A sess?o de inclus?o e diversidade teve um painel discutindo aspectos da inclus?o digital no Ecossistema Africano e a import?ncia de descongelar a tecnologia e o g?nero para trabalhar lado a lado no sector educacional atrav?s de mentoria e partilha de conhecimentos.
Os dois primeiros dias da reuni?o foram dedicados aos Dias AfNOG e AF*. A cerim?nia de abertura da AIS'21 Online foi assinalada por Sua Excel?ncia Augustin Kibassa, Ministro dos Correios, Telecomunica??es & TIC na Rep?blica Democr?tica do Congo, destacou a produ??o e fornecimento de servi?os digitais e actividades relacionadas que se est?o a desenvolver rapidamente em ?frica atrav?s da participa??o das administra??es p?blicas, do sector privado e das sociedades civis.
A sess?o "Construir a Economia Digital em ?frica", que apelou ? necessidade de investimento no desenvolvimento de infra-estruturas e constru??o de redes em toda a ?frica, com ?nfase na import?ncia da parceria p?blico-privada, onde os governos facilitam colabora??es e s?o os facilitadores em mat?ria de legisla??o, conectividade, empreendedorismo e protec??o de dados.
Vale a pena notar que durante a sess?o da AGMM, foram levantadas quest?es de privacidade, e conseguimos resolver rapidamente o que pudemos durante a reuni?o. Contudo, tom?mos nota de tais preocupa??es e iremos organizar webinars sobre a forma como a AFRINIC lida com a privacidade dos dados para partilhar e discutir as melhores pr?ticas actuais. 
Gostaria de agradecer ao nosso anfitri?o virtual ISPA-DRC, os nossos parceiros: AfNOG,a AF* e a AIS'21 Patrocinadores Online pelo vosso imenso apoio. Obrigado a todos os oradores e delegados do evento pelas ricas apresenta??es e conversas que enriqueceram este encontro. Os resumos da reuni?o on-line da AIS'21 est?o dispon?veis Aqui.

Curso AFRINIC Online - vers?o em ?rabe
Lan??mos recentemente o curso em linha "Criando o plano de endere?amento IPv6 perfeito" em ?rabe. O curso que est? dispon?vel em ingl?s e franc?s, ajuda-o a criar o melhor endere?amento hier?rquico poss?vel e facilita a agrega??o dos seus recursos. O curso foi desenvolvido e ? oferecido pela Academia AFRINIC. Gostaria de agradecer aos membros da nossa comunidade: Sara Alamin, Khansa Abdalla e Manhal Mohamed, pelo seu apoio na tradu??o do curso.

Pol?tica da Lame Delegation implementada na sua totalidade
 
AFRINIC entrou em funcionamento com a implementa??o integral da Pol?tica de Lame Delegation (sec??o 10.7 do Manual Consolidado de Pol?ticas) em 29 de Abril de 2021 e, desde ent?o, os testes de manqueira do DNS s?o efectuados diariamente a partir de pelo menos 3 localiza??es geogr?ficas. Quando ? encontrado um registo "nserver" num objecto "dom?nio" em dias consecutivos, s?o enviadas notifica??es nos dias 3, 10, 17 e 24 para contactos admin-c, tech-c e zone-c, enquanto no dia 11 ? adicionada uma observa??o no objecto "dom?nio" identificando o(s) nameserver(es) coxo(s). No dia 30, o registo "nserver" coxo ser? removido da base de dados WHOIS. Ap?s a remo??o de todos os registos "nserver" manco, se um objecto "dom?nio" for deixado com zero registos "nserver", o objecto "dom?nio" ser? removido da base de dados WHOIS. De acordo com a Pol?tica, esta medida assegura que os nameservers registados no WHOIS s?o de facto autorizados para as zonas relevantes, tornando o WHOIS uma fonte de informa??o fi?vel para os operadores de rede.
Mais informa??es sobre esta altera??o, conselhos e contactos para quest?es podem ser obtidos nesta publica??o em linha>> https://afrinic.net/20210428-lame-dns-delegation-policy . Uma ferramenta para relat?rios sobre delega??es coxo por dom?nio est? dispon?vel em >> https://afrinic.net/whois/lame

Desejo-vos as maiores felicidades na prossecu??o dos nossos objectivos e aspira??es comuns.


Cordiais cumprimentos,

Eddy Kayihura
Chefe do Executivo,
Centro de Informa??o da Rede Africana (AFRINIC)
ceo at afrinic.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210623/5fe17fe5/attachment.html>

From paul.wollner at africaoncloud.net  Thu Jun 24 08:27:54 2021
From: paul.wollner at africaoncloud.net (Paul Wollner)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 10:27:54 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM
In-Reply-To: <17a3cef3a06.c4eb9e01197209.7059284685887196559@africaoncloud.net>
References: <17a3cef3a06.c4eb9e01197209.7059284685887196559@africaoncloud.net>
Message-ID: <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>

Dear Chairperson,

?

Reference is made to the AGMM chaired by
you on the 4 June 2021.

?

I wish to put on record that at the AGMM we
were not given a reasonable opportunity to discuss and comment on the
management of AFRINIC and in particular to the following issues:-

?

Question
1

?

AFRINIC claims that any change in the IP
usage will require re-justifying the usage. Would it mean that, hypothetically,
if I have a web customer on my server and they leave to be replaced with a VPN
customer, will I need to seek AFRINIC?s approval first?

?

Question 1 was not discussed or
commented upon

?

Question
2

?

The rest of the world enjoys a 30 USD/IP at
a free open market. With AFRINIC having a transfer policy in place, will
AFRINIC still demand any unused IP be returned to them for free?

?

Question 2 was not discussed or
commented upon

?

Question
3

?

Out-of-region use was extensively discussed
within the last decade, and it was a consensus that pre-soft landing space is
allowed for out-of-region use. Yet, I heard that AFRINIC seems to be using
bylaw 6.1 to manage other people?s resource usage. This is not part of AFRINIC
policy and has, with good reason, never been approved by the community. Can
AFRINIC clarify its understanding of out-of-region usage to the member base?

?

Question 3 was not discussed or
commented upon

?

Question
4

?

Madhvi was in charge of the registration
department when the IP heist happened ? this, at the very least, shows her
incompetence, so why is she getting promoted instead of rightfully dismissed?

?

Question 4 was not discussed or
commented upon







Paul
Wollner
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210624/335c89cb/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Unaddressed queries - AGMM.pdf
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 78827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210624/335c89cb/attachment.obj>

From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Thu Jun 24 11:28:30 2021
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 04:28:30 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM
In-Reply-To: <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
Message-ID: <22904.1624534110@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919 at africaoncloud.net>, 
Paul Wollner <paul.wollner at africaoncloud.net> wrote:

>AFRINIC claims that any change in the IP usage will require
>re-justifying the usage. Would it mean that, hypothetically,
>if I have a web customer on my server and they leave to be replaced with a
>VPN customer, will I need to seek AFRINIC's approval first?

I also would like to see some discussion on this question.

To be clear that is not to say that I have any specific position on the
question.  I do not.  I am in fact of two minds about this.

It is clear to me that VPN's are primarily used for criminal activity
and/or evading and circumventing location-specific and/or IP-based
restrictions as implemented by many Internet services and web sites.

On that basis, it is my assertion that when used within the "free world",
VPN farms are an abomination.  Of course I have a rather different
feeling about them when they are used, e.g. within repressive countries
that attempt to control what parts of the Internet their citizens can see.
So at best, VPN's are a mixed blessing when viewed from a general public
policy standpoint.

From the standpoint of Internet governance policy, the case in favor
of large scale VPN farms is even much weaker.  It is demonstratably true
that the operation of large VPN farms is a poor and inefficient use of
IPv4 real estate.  A web server having adequate power can host 50,000
web sites via a single IPv4 address.  Likewise for a mail server, which
could service the email needs of 50,000 domain names on a single IPv4
address.  I am not presently aware of any such IP sharing technology when
it comes to VPNs and indeed even if any such sharing technology were
developed, it might not be used, in practice, because doing so might
defeat the whole point of using a VPN to begin with, i.e. to obtain a
unique and unblocked IP address in order to perform a technical "end-run"
around IP-based or region-based filters.

This is not to say that utilization of IP addresses for web or mail servers
is always terrifically efficient in all cases either.  I have seen vast
farms of IPv4 address space that are currently being used very inefficiently,
specifically to host massive farms of "cookie cutter" web sites, all of
which are promoting various kinds of porn and gambling to native Chinese
speakers.  (It it undoubtedly the case that these promotions are targeted
quite specifically at citizens of mainland China, even though both of these
forms of diversion are illegal within that country.  So here again we
have vast amounts of "precious" IPv4 address space effectively being
squandered to chase a couple of niche markets, neither of which having
much in the way of socially redeaming value, and markets with diminishing
returns, all based on widspread violations of law.)

But I have digressed, for which I apologize.

The question was wehether or not some Regional Internet Registry generally,
or AFRINIC specifically, have/has the authority to restrict the use of IP
address blocks which it has allocated to various parties.  It is an
interesting question and one for which I personally have no answer.  The
answer, wherever it is, quite certainly has global ramifications.

On the one hand, it is clear and unambiguous that -all- parties that have
received valuable IPv4 address allocations have an interest in seeking to
maximize the return-on-investment with respect to these assets... the same
as any owner of land would have.  And thus, Internet land owners are quite
naturally going to be loath relinquish -any- measure of control over the
assets in question, as doing so must certainly appear to them to have a
negative effect on their ability to monetize these asserts, at least over
the short term.

That fact having been noted, it is not always the case that "government
regulation" over land use is a Bad Thing, or that it will result in
private owners being unable to maximize the value of their assets.

As we here in the U.S. are aware due to our "Dust Bowl" era, unregulated
land use can prove disastrous for everyone, and this is by no means
merely a quaint historical fact of no relevance to the modern era.  The
U.N. notes that widspread destruction due to unregulated and poor land
use is an ongoing crisis TODAY:

https://www.unccd.int/news-events/poor-land-use-costs-countries-9-percent-equivalent-their-gdp-0

But setting aside the issue of land degradation, it should be noted also
that in the U.S., at least, and I suspect in many other places, so-called
"local zoning ordinances" do in fact restrict the rights of land owners
in ways that prohibit them from doing anything they want with their assets.

I think this is widely recognized to be all for the good.  If you live
in a vicinity that is zoned for "residential use only", you can lay your
head on the pillow at night and can rest easy knowing that you won't have
either a cattle slaughterhouse nor a skyscraper built right next to your
home anytime soon.

Although I have no personal knowledge of what AFRINIC either is doing or
what it may be proposing with regards to the kinds of uses that some or
all existing IP address allocations may be restricted to, I have no doubt
that, for lack of a better term, "IP zoning ordinances" may be a Good Thing,
overall, and for all concerned.  After all, is anyone really opposed to
"urban planning"?  Do you want to wake up one morning with your home in
the shadow of a new skyscraper which you never had anything to say about?

It is a sperate question, of course, as to who exactly is doing the planning
and the restricting.  I am in general agreement with the notion that when
it comes to IP assets that have been assigned by AFRINIC, the membership
should set the guidelines for all such regulations, and then staff should
be allowed to get on with the job of interpreting and enforcing those
community-approved guidelines.


Regards,
rfg



From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Thu Jun 24 11:29:57 2021
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 04:29:57 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM
In-Reply-To: <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
Message-ID: <22919.1624534197@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919 at africaoncloud.net>, 
Paul Wollner <paul.wollner at africaoncloud.net> wrote:

>Out-of-region use was extensively discussed
>within the last decade, and it was a consensus that pre-soft landing space is
>allowed for out-of-region use. Yet, I heard that AFRINIC seems to be using
>bylaw 6.1 to manage other people's resource usage. This is not part of AFRINIC
>policy and has, with good reason, never been approved by the community.

This happens to be a special point of interest for me.

Section 6.1 of the Bylaws reads as follows:

   6.1) Subject to the other provisions of this Article, membership shall
        be open to:

        i)  any Person who is geographically based within, and providing
            services in the African region, and who is engaged in the use
            of, or business of providing, open system protocol network
            services; or        

        ii) any other Person who is approved by the Board or the members.

There is no ambiguity here, and the matter is NOT up for debate.  AFRINIC
is a corporate entity and it is -legally obliged- to conform to its own
Bylaws.

It is most certainly the case that some persons and entities who are
currently listed as "members" of AFRINIC simply do not qualify as such
based on any reasonable reading of the above section of the Bylaws.

If the membership wishes to *change* the Bylaws, then it may be free to
do so, under Mauritius law.  But as of this moment, the Bylaws simply ARE
what the Bylaws are, and they are NOT ambiguous.

Some parties currently listed as "members" of AFRINIC are *not* providing
*any* "services in the African region".  They are, instead profiteers and
carpetbaggers who have effectively looted what they could from AFRINIC and
then laughed all the way to the bank. (I prefer not to mention any names,
but the handle ORG-FGI1-AFRINIC comes immediately to mind.)

You can question whether or not AFRINIC should be allowing totally free
and totally unfettered use of, and transfers of, IP addres blocks that 
AFRINIC has given out, but then if that was in fact the plan all along,
then a reasonable person would necessarily have to stop and ask himself:
"Well, then, what was the point of establishing AFRINIC as a separate
and independent RIR in the first place anyway?"

If people were all just going to descend on AFRINIC, like vultures, grab
whatever they could and then abscond with their booty to the RIPE region
or the ARIN region or the APNIC region or the LACNIC region, then we could
all have saved a lot of time and bother by never even creating AFRINIC in
the first place.


Regards,
rfg


P.S.  I personally would be entirely happy if all of the five existing RIRs
were folded into a single global entity.  That would certain make it easier
for me, i.e. if I only had to parse a single flavor of WHOIS records, instead
of five different flavors, like I have to deal with now.  But somehow I
suspect that the various people who work for all five of these Regional
Internet Registries might hold a somewhat different view on the matter.



From jeffery_sky-99 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 25 09:04:56 2021
From: jeffery_sky-99 at yahoo.com (jeffery_sky)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2021 09:04:56 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM
In-Reply-To: <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
References: <17a3cef3a06.c4eb9e01197209.7059284685887196559@africaoncloud.net>
 <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
Message-ID: <728534083.4643807.1624611896607@mail.yahoo.com>

 
Dear all,?


I believe it is crucial to take into consideration Paul?s statement. Indeed, during the AGMM, many questions were not properly addressed, also, individuals with comments or concerns were automatically interrupted, therefore, their inquiries rejected.?


Mainly, the participants who did not get the opportunity to express their thoughts, were trying to tackle some serious issues about the system of management of AFRINIC as an RIR.?


AFRINIC staff needs to provide the community with specific responses to the questions raised by Paul, due to their problematic nature, also, simply, to clarify any misunderstandings or new provisions that need to be discussed. Frankly, I assume it is unacceptable for an RIR to impose such rules and I firmly believe that the fair market value of IP addresses needs to be applicable in AFRINIC?s service area.?


Moreover, we cannot turn a blind eye to all the things that went south in the history of AFRINIC, if we strive for excellence and improvement, we need to cut off defected systems and anomalies from the root.?


Best,?



     On Thursday, June 24, 2021, 05:28:49 PM GMT+9, Paul Wollner <paul.wollner at africaoncloud.net> wrote:  
 
 
Dear Chairperson,

?


Reference is made to the AGMM chaired byyou on the 4 June 2021.


?


I wish to put on record that at the AGMM wewere not given a reasonable opportunity to discuss and comment on themanagement of AFRINIC and in particular to the following issues:-


?


Question1


?


AFRINIC claims that any change in the IPusage will require re-justifying the usage. Would it mean that, hypothetically,if I have a web customer on my server and they leave to be replaced with a VPNcustomer, will I need to seek AFRINIC?s approval first?


?


Question 1 was not discussed orcommented upon


?


Question2


?


The rest of the world enjoys a 30 USD/IP ata free open market. With AFRINIC having a transfer policy in place, willAFRINIC still demand any unused IP be returned to them for free?


?


Question 2 was not discussed orcommented upon


?


Question3


?


Out-of-region use was extensively discussedwithin the last decade, and it was a consensus that pre-soft landing space isallowed for out-of-region use. Yet, I heard that AFRINIC seems to be usingbylaw 6.1 to manage other people?s resource usage. This is not part of AFRINICpolicy and has, with good reason, never been approved by the community. CanAFRINIC clarify its understanding of out-of-region usage to the member base?


?


Question 3 was not discussed orcommented upon


?


Question4


?


Madhvi was in charge of the registrationdepartment when the IP heist happened ? this, at the very least, shows herincompetence, so why is she getting promoted instead of rightfully dismissed?


?


Question 4 was not discussed orcommented upon











PaulWollner







_______________________________________________
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/20210625/5697ffff/attachment.html>

From ibeanusielvis at gmail.com  Sat Jun 26 04:33:30 2021
From: ibeanusielvis at gmail.com (Ibeanusi Elvis)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2021 13:33:30 +0900
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM
In-Reply-To: <728534083.4643807.1624611896607@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <17a3cef3a06.c4eb9e01197209.7059284685887196559@africaoncloud.net>
 <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
 <728534083.4643807.1624611896607@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CANanHiy9U0x9qFNKWkea_yQY_gUJ4671TZ7FAcqqWHNGk0wCJQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

Although I didn?t participate in the AGMM on the 4th of June, 2021 but:

As Paul pointed out, personally I concur that first, giving everyone an
equal opportunity to discuss as well as comment should be something that
the AFRINIC should strive to improve on at all conferences, summits and so
on.

Additionally, I believe that the purpose of conducting the AGMM was to
discuss and find resolutions for issues like the ones raised by Paul and
not giving them the opportunity to discuss and resolve those issues is not
a pleasing sight. Likewise for question 3: AFRINIC should not be using any
bylaw that is not part of an AFRINIC Policy and has never been approved by
the community to manage the resources usage for people. This to me is an
abuse and misuse of power.

Elvis

On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 18:09 jeffery_sky via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss at afrinic.net> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I believe it is crucial to take into consideration Paul?s statement.
> Indeed, during the AGMM, many questions were not properly addressed, also,
> individuals with comments or concerns were automatically interrupted,
> therefore, their inquiries rejected.
>
> Mainly, the participants who did not get the opportunity to express their
> thoughts, were trying to tackle some serious issues about the system of
> management of AFRINIC as an RIR.
>
> AFRINIC staff needs to provide the community with specific responses to
> the questions raised by Paul, due to their problematic nature, also,
> simply, to clarify any misunderstandings or new provisions that need to be
> discussed. Frankly, I assume it is unacceptable for an RIR to impose such
> rules and I firmly believe that the fair market value of IP addresses needs
> to be applicable in AFRINIC?s service area.
>
> Moreover, we cannot turn a blind eye to all the things that went south in
> the history of AFRINIC, if we strive for excellence and improvement, we
> need to cut off defected systems and anomalies from the root.
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> On Thursday, June 24, 2021, 05:28:49 PM GMT+9, Paul Wollner <
> paul.wollner at africaoncloud.net> wrote:
>
>
> Dear Chairperson,
>
>
>
> Reference is made to the AGMM chaired by you on the 4 June 2021.
>
>
>
> I wish to put on record that at the AGMM we were not given a reasonable
> opportunity to discuss and comment on the management of AFRINIC and in
> particular to the following issues:-
>
>
>
> *Question 1*
>
>
>
> AFRINIC claims that any change in the IP usage will require re-justifying
> the usage. Would it mean that, hypothetically, if I have a web customer on
> my server and they leave to be replaced with a VPN customer, will I need to
> seek AFRINIC?s approval first?
>
>
>
> *Question 1 was not discussed or commented upon*
>
>
>
> *Question 2*
>
>
>
> The rest of the world enjoys a 30 USD/IP at a free open market. With
> AFRINIC having a transfer policy in place, will AFRINIC still demand any
> unused IP be returned to them for free?
>
>
>
> *Question 2 was not discussed or commented upon*
>
>
>
> *Question 3*
>
>
>
> Out-of-region use was extensively discussed within the last decade, and it
> was a consensus that pre-soft landing space is allowed for out-of-region
> use. Yet, I heard that AFRINIC seems to be using bylaw 6.1 to manage other
> people?s resource usage. This is not part of AFRINIC policy and has, with
> good reason, never been approved by the community. Can AFRINIC clarify its
> understanding of out-of-region usage to the member base?
>
>
>
> *Question 3 was not discussed or commented upon*
>
>
>
> *Question 4*
>
>
>
> Madhvi was in charge of the registration department when the IP heist
> happened ? this, at the very least, shows her incompetence, so why is she
> getting promoted instead of rightfully dismissed?
>
>
>
> *Question 4 was not discussed or commented upon*
>
>
>
>
> *Paul Wollner*
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210626/6717a7b2/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Sat Jun 26 06:29:06 2021
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2021 09:29:06 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM
In-Reply-To: <22919.1624534197@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
References: <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
 <22919.1624534197@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWZbPbFHq3RdogZNm85ffgWjuNeWq+fcpBaWBsFgs4nuGg@mail.gmail.com>

Hey Ronald,

You are spot on.....

I have always argued that every single IPv4 integer that numbers a NIC on
some router/server on this continent, goes to have a profound
socio-economic impact, whether its some unemployed AFRINIC youth who has
figured that they can run a small ecommerce business off a local ecommerce
platform or a Telecom/ISP that is doing what it takes to get every single
AFRICAN connected to the Internet on the AFRICAN Continent.

Folk got guts out here openly telling folks that we ought to turn intergers
into a commodity worthy some 30USD.

My question to AFRINIC, do your resource members justification for IPv4
needs, include that of running IPv4 Leasing?

Does AFRINIC have IPv4 brokers as resource members?

Because it seems to me that folk out here are arguing that IPv4 integers
themselves are meant to be some product sold at 30USD.

My understanding was that the need for IPv4 was for the intergers to be
used by the requester to number infrastructure for their networks/systems
and their downstram customers/users so as to offer a wide range on
services/products that Impact AFRICA's socio-economically and politically
from, NREN, Higher Learning Institutions, Agriculture, ISP/Telecoms,
Egovernment, FINTECH, SME's, Ecommerce (I know of unemployed youth
leveraging the power of online platforms to forge a decent life and
economically empower themselves through ecommorce, entertainment,
influencers etc). The true digital transformation if you will.

So I really need to understand what Paul is going on about to ascertain
what I view as clear misunderstanding and misinterpretation of what AFRINIC
is all about.

Cheers,
Noah

PS: RFG ....What is your poison?    .... The least I could do is, ship you
a cold Vodka or The Walking John :-).

On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 2:34 PM Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg at tristatelogic.com>
wrote:

> In message <
> 17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919 at africaoncloud.net>,
> Paul Wollner <paul.wollner at africaoncloud.net> wrote:
>
> >Out-of-region use was extensively discussed
> >within the last decade, and it was a consensus that pre-soft landing
> space is
> >allowed for out-of-region use. Yet, I heard that AFRINIC seems to be using
> >bylaw 6.1 to manage other people's resource usage. This is not part of
> AFRINIC
> >policy and has, with good reason, never been approved by the community.
>
> This happens to be a special point of interest for me.
>
> Section 6.1 of the Bylaws reads as follows:
>
>    6.1) Subject to the other provisions of this Article, membership shall
>         be open to:
>
>         i)  any Person who is geographically based within, and providing
>             services in the African region, and who is engaged in the use
>             of, or business of providing, open system protocol network
>             services; or
>
>         ii) any other Person who is approved by the Board or the members.
>
> There is no ambiguity here, and the matter is NOT up for debate.  AFRINIC
> is a corporate entity and it is -legally obliged- to conform to its own
> Bylaws.
>
> It is most certainly the case that some persons and entities who are
> currently listed as "members" of AFRINIC simply do not qualify as such
> based on any reasonable reading of the above section of the Bylaws.
>
> If the membership wishes to *change* the Bylaws, then it may be free to
> do so, under Mauritius law.  But as of this moment, the Bylaws simply ARE
> what the Bylaws are, and they are NOT ambiguous.
>
> Some parties currently listed as "members" of AFRINIC are *not* providing
> *any* "services in the African region".  They are, instead profiteers and
> carpetbaggers who have effectively looted what they could from AFRINIC and
> then laughed all the way to the bank. (I prefer not to mention any names,
> but the handle ORG-FGI1-AFRINIC comes immediately to mind.)
>
> You can question whether or not AFRINIC should be allowing totally free
> and totally unfettered use of, and transfers of, IP addres blocks that
> AFRINIC has given out, but then if that was in fact the plan all along,
> then a reasonable person would necessarily have to stop and ask himself:
> "Well, then, what was the point of establishing AFRINIC as a separate
> and independent RIR in the first place anyway?"
>
> If people were all just going to descend on AFRINIC, like vultures, grab
> whatever they could and then abscond with their booty to the RIPE region
> or the ARIN region or the APNIC region or the LACNIC region, then we could
> all have saved a lot of time and bother by never even creating AFRINIC in
> the first place.
>
>
> Regards,
> rfg
>
>
> P.S.  I personally would be entirely happy if all of the five existing RIRs
> were folded into a single global entity.  That would certain make it easier
> for me, i.e. if I only had to parse a single flavor of WHOIS records,
> instead
> of five different flavors, like I have to deal with now.  But somehow I
> suspect that the various people who work for all five of these Regional
> Internet Registries might hold a somewhat different view on the matter.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210626/88aae6a3/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Sat Jun 26 07:17:35 2021
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2021 10:17:35 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM
In-Reply-To: <CANanHiy9U0x9qFNKWkea_yQY_gUJ4671TZ7FAcqqWHNGk0wCJQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <17a3cef3a06.c4eb9e01197209.7059284685887196559@africaoncloud.net>
 <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
 <728534083.4643807.1624611896607@mail.yahoo.com>
 <CANanHiy9U0x9qFNKWkea_yQY_gUJ4671TZ7FAcqqWHNGk0wCJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWbO3YJGECPdg5Chc4RrUnLNwi0oGz5Uj1g78+febT-x9A@mail.gmail.com>

Oga Elvis,

On Sat, 26 Jun 2021, 07:40 Ibeanusi Elvis, <ibeanusielvis at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> AFRINIC should not be using any bylaw that is not part of an AFRINIC Policy
>

You clearly do not understand what you are talking about. The Bylaws are in
fact what AFRINIC operates by.....

and has never been approved by the community to manage the resources usage
> for people.
>

Look here brother, AFRINIC resource members form part of the community.
They come from the wider community. They remain part of the internet
community and they are empowered as resources members to determine how
resources are used and that is why the section Paul is quoting in the
Bylaws exists in those Bylaws.

Resource members agreed to add that section in the Bylaws through special
resolutions.

This to me is an abuse and misuse of power.
>

You do not know what you are taking about.

One word.... READ.

Noah

>
> Elvis
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210626/25bbf295/attachment.html>

From owen at delong.com  Sat Jun 26 08:57:10 2021
From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2021 01:57:10 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during
 AGMM
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWZbPbFHq3RdogZNm85ffgWjuNeWq+fcpBaWBsFgs4nuGg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
 <22919.1624534197@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
 <CAEqgTWZbPbFHq3RdogZNm85ffgWjuNeWq+fcpBaWBsFgs4nuGg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7@delong.com>



> On Jun 25, 2021, at 23:29 , Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
> 
> Hey Ronald,
> 
> You are spot on.....
> 
> I have always argued that every single IPv4 integer that numbers a NIC on some router/server on this continent, goes to have a profound socio-economic impact, whether its some unemployed AFRINIC youth who has figured that they can run a small ecommerce business off a local ecommerce platform or a Telecom/ISP that is doing what it takes to get every single AFRICAN connected to the Internet on the AFRICAN Continent.
> 
> Folk got guts out here openly telling folks that we ought to turn intergers into a commodity worthy some 30USD.

> 
> My question to AFRINIC, do your resource members justification for IPv4 needs, include that of running IPv4 Leasing? 

Virtually every LIR leases addresses in one form or another. What is your exact definition of leasing in this context?
What definition do you (apparently) feel should be or is precluded by policy?
If you feel that some definition is precluded by policy, please point to the relevant policy by section number in the CPM.

> Does AFRINIC have IPv4 brokers as resource members?

Are you saying that an LIR who is also a broker is not entitled to membership for some reason? Unless that is your claim,
what is the point of this question?

> Because it seems to me that folk out here are arguing that IPv4 integers themselves are meant to be some product sold at 30USD.

Whether you like it or not, whether I like it or not (and I?m not overly fond of it), the reality is that IP address registrations (not the
addresses themselves, actually) are being bought and sold for ~30USD each every day all over the world.  I held out against this
longer than virtually anyone else in the ARIN region, but eventually even I had to face the reality that the sale of IP address
registrations was going to be a reality and the question was whether it would include updates to WHOIS or simply become
a way in which the registry became progressively less meaningful/less useful over time.

What we were able to do is somewhat (even mostly in most regions) preserve the needs basis for receiving addresses
even if received through a purchase.

> My understanding was that the need for IPv4 was for the intergers to be used by the requester to number infrastructure for their networks/systems and their downstram customers/users so as to offer a wide range on services/products that Impact AFRICA's socio-economically and politically from, NREN, Higher Learning Institutions, Agriculture, ISP/Telecoms, Egovernment, FINTECH, SME's, Ecommerce (I know of unemployed youth leveraging the power of online platforms to forge a decent life and economically empower themselves through ecommorce, entertainment, influencers etc). The true digital transformation if you will.
> 
> So I really need to understand what Paul is going on about to ascertain what I view as clear misunderstanding and misinterpretation of what AFRINIC is all about.

Here?s where you lose me. I have tremendous difficulty connecting your mostly rational questions/statements above with this. Please point to the part of the bylaws, RSA, or CPM that constrains number usage to things which impact AFRICA socio-economically or politically. I don?t recall seeing either of those terms in any of the three documents. It?s certainly not contained in section 6 of the bylaws.

[snip]
RFG?s early post about members which have no nexus in the region being the ?clearly prohibited? case.
[/snip]


Note that Ronald makes it clear that entities which have no nexus in the AFRINIC service
region should not be eligible for membership. However, that?s not what Paul?s question was
about. We?ll call that the ?clearly prohibited? case.

The obviously ?permitted? case is an entity which operates exclusively within the AFRINIC
region.

The gray area in between those two extremes is where clarification appears to be sought.

AFRINIC has been claiming that entities with operations both within and outside of the
AFRINIC service region should not be allowed to use their AFRINIC resources on their
infrastructure outside fo the AFRINIC region.

IMHO (and others share this opinion), section 6 of the bylaws does not provide a basis
for AFRINIC to make such a claim. IMHO, one meets the requirements of section 6 if
one merely has a business presence (legal nexus) within the AFRINIC service region
and some amount of operations there. It does not matter whether that is the majority
of ones operations, a tiny fraction, or what. As long as one:
	1.	Is domiciled within the region (legal nexus).
	2.	Has some operations (including infrastructure) within the region.
and	3.	Provides some services within the region.

Then one meets the tests of section 6 of the bylaws as currently written, regardless
of what portion of one?s network are numbered using AFRINIC resources and regardless
of what fraction of your (pre-soft-landing-phase-2) resources are used elsewhere.

If the membership wants to change that, then there is a process for updating the
bylaws, but until that update happens, there is a need for clarity from AFRINIC on
whether they intend to continue to pursue their previously stated misinterpretations
of the bylaws requiring ALL usage to be in-region.

I won?t presume to speak for Paul, but I do know that Paul has operations both
inside the AFRINIC region and outside, so perhaps that is what ?Paul is going
on about?. I?m sure he can clarify if I am wrong.

Owen





From pascosoft at gmail.com  Sat Jun 26 09:39:37 2021
From: pascosoft at gmail.com (Paschal Ochang)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2021 10:39:37 +0100
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during
	AGMM
In-Reply-To: <7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7@delong.com>
References: <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
 <22919.1624534197@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
 <CAEqgTWZbPbFHq3RdogZNm85ffgWjuNeWq+fcpBaWBsFgs4nuGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7@delong.com>
Message-ID: <CAMU0wT4yo02WTOAyZZjbKNrDXgQjDxs3O6ig5-pzg3tEzYyH2A@mail.gmail.com>

+1 @Owen

On Saturday, June 26, 2021, Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss at afrinic.net> wrote:

>
>
> > On Jun 25, 2021, at 23:29 , Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
> >
> > Hey Ronald,
> >
> > You are spot on.....
> >
> > I have always argued that every single IPv4 integer that numbers a NIC
> on some router/server on this continent, goes to have a profound
> socio-economic impact, whether its some unemployed AFRINIC youth who has
> figured that they can run a small ecommerce business off a local ecommerce
> platform or a Telecom/ISP that is doing what it takes to get every single
> AFRICAN connected to the Internet on the AFRICAN Continent.
> >
> > Folk got guts out here openly telling folks that we ought to turn
> intergers into a commodity worthy some 30USD.
>
> >
> > My question to AFRINIC, do your resource members justification for IPv4
> needs, include that of running IPv4 Leasing?
>
> Virtually every LIR leases addresses in one form or another. What is your
> exact definition of leasing in this context?
> What definition do you (apparently) feel should be or is precluded by
> policy?
> If you feel that some definition is precluded by policy, please point to
> the relevant policy by section number in the CPM.
>
> > Does AFRINIC have IPv4 brokers as resource members?
>
> Are you saying that an LIR who is also a broker is not entitled to
> membership for some reason? Unless that is your claim,
> what is the point of this question?
>
> > Because it seems to me that folk out here are arguing that IPv4 integers
> themselves are meant to be some product sold at 30USD.
>
> Whether you like it or not, whether I like it or not (and I?m not overly
> fond of it), the reality is that IP address registrations (not the
> addresses themselves, actually) are being bought and sold for ~30USD each
> every day all over the world.  I held out against this
> longer than virtually anyone else in the ARIN region, but eventually even
> I had to face the reality that the sale of IP address
> registrations was going to be a reality and the question was whether it
> would include updates to WHOIS or simply become
> a way in which the registry became progressively less meaningful/less
> useful over time.
>
> What we were able to do is somewhat (even mostly in most regions) preserve
> the needs basis for receiving addresses
> even if received through a purchase.
>
> > My understanding was that the need for IPv4 was for the intergers to be
> used by the requester to number infrastructure for their networks/systems
> and their downstram customers/users so as to offer a wide range on
> services/products that Impact AFRICA's socio-economically and politically
> from, NREN, Higher Learning Institutions, Agriculture, ISP/Telecoms,
> Egovernment, FINTECH, SME's, Ecommerce (I know of unemployed youth
> leveraging the power of online platforms to forge a decent life and
> economically empower themselves through ecommorce, entertainment,
> influencers etc). The true digital transformation if you will.
> >
> > So I really need to understand what Paul is going on about to ascertain
> what I view as clear misunderstanding and misinterpretation of what AFRINIC
> is all about.
>
> Here?s where you lose me. I have tremendous difficulty connecting your
> mostly rational questions/statements above with this. Please point to the
> part of the bylaws, RSA, or CPM that constrains number usage to things
> which impact AFRICA socio-economically or politically. I don?t recall
> seeing either of those terms in any of the three documents. It?s certainly
> not contained in section 6 of the bylaws.
>
> [snip]
> RFG?s early post about members which have no nexus in the region being the
> ?clearly prohibited? case.
> [/snip]
>
>
> Note that Ronald makes it clear that entities which have no nexus in the
> AFRINIC service
> region should not be eligible for membership. However, that?s not what
> Paul?s question was
> about. We?ll call that the ?clearly prohibited? case.
>
> The obviously ?permitted? case is an entity which operates exclusively
> within the AFRINIC
> region.
>
> The gray area in between those two extremes is where clarification appears
> to be sought.
>
> AFRINIC has been claiming that entities with operations both within and
> outside of the
> AFRINIC service region should not be allowed to use their AFRINIC
> resources on their
> infrastructure outside fo the AFRINIC region.
>
> IMHO (and others share this opinion), section 6 of the bylaws does not
> provide a basis
> for AFRINIC to make such a claim. IMHO, one meets the requirements of
> section 6 if
> one merely has a business presence (legal nexus) within the AFRINIC
> service region
> and some amount of operations there. It does not matter whether that is
> the majority
> of ones operations, a tiny fraction, or what. As long as one:
>         1.      Is domiciled within the region (legal nexus).
>         2.      Has some operations (including infrastructure) within the
> region.
> and     3.      Provides some services within the region.
>
> Then one meets the tests of section 6 of the bylaws as currently written,
> regardless
> of what portion of one?s network are numbered using AFRINIC resources and
> regardless
> of what fraction of your (pre-soft-landing-phase-2) resources are used
> elsewhere.
>
> If the membership wants to change that, then there is a process for
> updating the
> bylaws, but until that update happens, there is a need for clarity from
> AFRINIC on
> whether they intend to continue to pursue their previously stated
> misinterpretations
> of the bylaws requiring ALL usage to be in-region.
>
> I won?t presume to speak for Paul, but I do know that Paul has operations
> both
> inside the AFRINIC region and outside, so perhaps that is what ?Paul is
> going
> on about?. I?m sure he can clarify if I am wrong.
>
> Owen
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>


-- 
Kind regards,

Paschal.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210626/7e28319a/attachment.html>

From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Sun Jun 27 00:05:08 2021
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2021 17:05:08 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWZbPbFHq3RdogZNm85ffgWjuNeWq+fcpBaWBsFgs4nuGg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <45246.1624752308@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <CAEqgTWZbPbFHq3RdogZNm85ffgWjuNeWq+fcpBaWBsFgs4nuGg at mail.gmail.com>
Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:

>Folk got guts out here openly telling folks that we ought to turn intergers
>into a commodity worthy some 30USD.

Well, there are clearly two very different ways to look at this.

The "old way", which is how the Internet was operated from the beginning
says that we should have some small set of intelligent and benign dictators
sitting atop everything, and those folks should give number resources
"to each according to his need".

The exact way I phrased that is not at all accidental.  It is one half of
what may father taught me was the definition of "communism"... at least
Soviet-style communism... back when I was a boy, some 50+ years ago, and
in the midst of the Cold War.

The entire Soviet communist mantra, as my dad described it to me, was "From
each according to his ability.  To each according to his need."

As a guiding principal of social systems, I think we all know now that this
didn't really work out all that well in the end.  Not for the Soviets,
and not even for the Chinese, who these days are agressive capitalists
even while still claiming to be communists in some limited respects.

Of course on the opposite end of the spectrum from that we have totally
unfettered laissez faire capitalism, sometimes known as "dog eat dog"
and/or "the devil take the hindmost".  As a basis for a social system
it can be pretty easily argued that this doesn't work out all that well
in the long run either.  (I say this even though my own countrymen are,
even as we speak, ceaselessly bickering about this, and about the proper
role of government in economic affairs.)

Being the kind of jaded iconoclastic person that I am, I have told friends
that really, in my opinion, these radically divergent views on the role
of the state in economic affairs will, for most ordinary people, come down
to just a simple choice:  Would you rather be ripped off by corrupt thieves
in government or by corrupt thieves in industry?

For those on the bottom of the socio-economic totem pole who lack political
and/or economic influence, these are really the only two available options.

To return to the point however there is an argument to be made in favor of
treating IP addresess as just simple (mostly fungible) commodities. I myself
have frequently made this argument. I do so every time I see that some
spammer has squatted on a piece of unused and fallow IP address space.
I always say "Gee!  If these IP address were worth more, then the real
owner would take better care of them and would not let mere spammers
spoil their long term value!"  (A similar argument has been made frequently
about "legal" land ownership in the third world.  It is said that because
many people in the third world have simply lived on "their" land for
generations, even though they have no legal documents they could use to
assert ownership, this is a HUGE problem, because not being "legal" owners,
the people tend to take less good care of the land than they otherwise would.)

So anyway, as far as IP addresses are concerned, we have had, in effect,
a benign (and fundemantally communist) dictatorship in the form of the
five Regional Internet Registries, and the National Science Foundation
and dr. Jon Postel even before that.  They gave "to each according to
his needs".  This all started to dissolve away on ore about Mar 24, 2011
when Microsoft acquired 666,624 legacy IPv4 addresses from Nortel...
*without* the specific consent of ARIN.  And the rest, as they say, is
history.

At the moment, we seem to have a mixed (capitalist/communist) system of
allocating and/or acquiring IP addresses.  And at the moment this ad hoc
system seems to is succeding primarily at creating controversy and discord.

I don't know what the answer is.  I just know that I become mad as hell
whenever I see what I regard as the "wrong people" getting big chunks of
IPv4 address space... somehow.

Abraham Lincoln once famously said "I do not expect the house to fall, but
I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or
all the other."

He was speaking of slavery, not capitalism versus communism when it comes
to IP addresses of course, but if history is any guide, this pronouncement
of his -will- untimately prevail, as it already has done, i.e. with the fall
of the old Soviet Union and the conversion of China into an agressively
capitalist society.

In short, I believe that in the end we will have a totally free global
market in IP addresses, and that the RIRs will either actually or effectively
cease to play the roles they now play.

That is not to say that I think we either can or should have a totally
unregulated, totally laissez faire "anything goes" approach to Internet
governance.  The private sector simply does not adequately value investments,
such as schools, universities, basic research labs, art museums and so forth
that society as a whole rightfully puts significant value on.  So I do
think that the RIRs ought to develop some thoughtful and well-reasoned
polices that will, in effect, subsidize these kinds of socially necessary
activities and institutions, and that will insure that they don't have to
go begging, cap in hand, in the "dog eat dog" open market in order to fill
their reasonable and well justified address space needs.

>Does AFRINIC have IPv4 brokers as resource members?

I think that the answwer to this question is not at all ambiguous.


Regards,
rfg


P.S.  This whole issue of "reserving" some "space" (in this case, space
in the DNS tree) for non-profit and public benefit organizations recently
came to a head when ICANN tried to sell off the entire .org TLD to a group
of venture capital funded private investors.

The outcome of that controversy is instructive, I think.

Suffice it to say that in the end, the public interest prevailed and the
buccaneer capitalists *did not* get everything they were hoping for.

Many people across the globe applauded this outcome.

I was one of them.



From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Sun Jun 27 00:24:54 2021
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2021 17:24:54 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during
	AGMM
In-Reply-To: <7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7@delong.com>
Message-ID: <45329.1624753494@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7 at delong.com>, 
Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

>Note that Ronald makes it clear that entities which have no nexus in the
>AFRINIC service region should not be eligible for membership.

Just to clarify, that's not exactly what I said.  I quoted the Bylaws.
They say that one must have -both- a business footprint in the region
-and- also must be providing some (unspecified) amount of service
within the region.

>IMHO, one meets the requirements of section 6 if
>one merely has a business presence (legal nexus) within the AFRINIC
>service region and some amount of operations there.

I am compelled to agree with that interpretation of the Bylaws, as
currently written.  (Note that some current members provably provide
-zero- services within the region at the present time.)

Not that I personally wouldn't have it be otherwise, if I could.

In the LACNIC region, a minimum of 50% in-region usage is required.

Seems reasonable to me.

In fact it seems even -more- than reasonable to me in the specific case
of AFRINIC, given the history of all that has gone on, specifically the
dubious assignments, and separate from that, the general and now well-
documented looting and pillaging that has gone on, which has exclusively
ended up benefitting non-Africans.

(This has all been quite untowards and unsavory in its apperance, and that
is *not* an inconsequential point.  How many here would be happy to hear
that deliveries of vaccines to Africa, e.g. from the U.N., had been
massively rampped up, but that some significant fraction of those was
being diverted into the black market, only to be resold in, for example,
Estonia?)


Regards,
rfg



From ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com  Sun Jun 27 03:50:03 2021
From: ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com (Anthony Ubah)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2021 23:50:03 -0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWZbPbFHq3RdogZNm85ffgWjuNeWq+fcpBaWBsFgs4nuGg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
 <22919.1624534197@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
 <CAEqgTWZbPbFHq3RdogZNm85ffgWjuNeWq+fcpBaWBsFgs4nuGg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHcb0ARM5VZzWV5XxzS1=m80rCTb-2MDA-FPO18q_PSBJV7wtQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Noah,

It has become obvious that it is difficult for you to contribute to
discussions or raise an opinion without being condescending.
It is natural for people to have diverse views. Things were never always
the same. Every moment in history is layered in old and new ways. It's not
healthy to be averse to change (good or bad). Open mindedness is key

The points Paul raised are topical issues, and in my opinion, these are
deserving of a deep dive.

NB: Series of "unemployment youths" are the architects of alot of the the
present day(future) norms and innovation.

Let's not be dinosaurs.


Kind regards,

Anthony


On Sat, Jun 26, 2021, 2:32 AM Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:

> Hey Ronald,
>
> You are spot on.....
>
> I have always argued that every single IPv4 integer that numbers a NIC on
> some router/server on this continent, goes to have a profound
> socio-economic impact, whether its some unemployed AFRINIC youth who has
> figured that they can run a small ecommerce business off a local ecommerce
> platform or a Telecom/ISP that is doing what it takes to get every single
> AFRICAN connected to the Internet on the AFRICAN Continent.
>
> Folk got guts out here openly telling folks that we ought to turn
> intergers into a commodity worthy some 30USD.
>
> My question to AFRINIC, do your resource members justification for IPv4
> needs, include that of running IPv4 Leasing?
>
> Does AFRINIC have IPv4 brokers as resource members?
>
> Because it seems to me that folk out here are arguing that IPv4 integers
> themselves are meant to be some product sold at 30USD.
>
> My understanding was that the need for IPv4 was for the intergers to be
> used by the requester to number infrastructure for their networks/systems
> and their downstram customers/users so as to offer a wide range on
> services/products that Impact AFRICA's socio-economically and politically
> from, NREN, Higher Learning Institutions, Agriculture, ISP/Telecoms,
> Egovernment, FINTECH, SME's, Ecommerce (I know of unemployed youth
> leveraging the power of online platforms to forge a decent life and
> economically empower themselves through ecommorce, entertainment,
> influencers etc). The true digital transformation if you will.
>
> So I really need to understand what Paul is going on about to ascertain
> what I view as clear misunderstanding and misinterpretation of what AFRINIC
> is all about.
>
> Cheers,
> Noah
>
> PS: RFG ....What is your poison?    .... The least I could do is, ship you
> a cold Vodka or The Walking John :-).
>
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 2:34 PM Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg at tristatelogic.com>
> wrote:
>
>> In message <
>> 17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919 at africaoncloud.net>,
>> Paul Wollner <paul.wollner at africaoncloud.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Out-of-region use was extensively discussed
>> >within the last decade, and it was a consensus that pre-soft landing
>> space is
>> >allowed for out-of-region use. Yet, I heard that AFRINIC seems to be
>> using
>> >bylaw 6.1 to manage other people's resource usage. This is not part of
>> AFRINIC
>> >policy and has, with good reason, never been approved by the community.
>>
>> This happens to be a special point of interest for me.
>>
>> Section 6.1 of the Bylaws reads as follows:
>>
>>    6.1) Subject to the other provisions of this Article, membership shall
>>         be open to:
>>
>>         i)  any Person who is geographically based within, and providing
>>             services in the African region, and who is engaged in the use
>>             of, or business of providing, open system protocol network
>>             services; or
>>
>>         ii) any other Person who is approved by the Board or the members.
>>
>> There is no ambiguity here, and the matter is NOT up for debate.  AFRINIC
>> is a corporate entity and it is -legally obliged- to conform to its own
>> Bylaws.
>>
>> It is most certainly the case that some persons and entities who are
>> currently listed as "members" of AFRINIC simply do not qualify as such
>> based on any reasonable reading of the above section of the Bylaws.
>>
>> If the membership wishes to *change* the Bylaws, then it may be free to
>> do so, under Mauritius law.  But as of this moment, the Bylaws simply ARE
>> what the Bylaws are, and they are NOT ambiguous.
>>
>> Some parties currently listed as "members" of AFRINIC are *not* providing
>> *any* "services in the African region".  They are, instead profiteers and
>> carpetbaggers who have effectively looted what they could from AFRINIC and
>> then laughed all the way to the bank. (I prefer not to mention any names,
>> but the handle ORG-FGI1-AFRINIC comes immediately to mind.)
>>
>> You can question whether or not AFRINIC should be allowing totally free
>> and totally unfettered use of, and transfers of, IP addres blocks that
>> AFRINIC has given out, but then if that was in fact the plan all along,
>> then a reasonable person would necessarily have to stop and ask himself:
>> "Well, then, what was the point of establishing AFRINIC as a separate
>> and independent RIR in the first place anyway?"
>>
>> If people were all just going to descend on AFRINIC, like vultures, grab
>> whatever they could and then abscond with their booty to the RIPE region
>> or the ARIN region or the APNIC region or the LACNIC region, then we could
>> all have saved a lot of time and bother by never even creating AFRINIC in
>> the first place.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> rfg
>>
>>
>> P.S.  I personally would be entirely happy if all of the five existing
>> RIRs
>> were folded into a single global entity.  That would certain make it
>> easier
>> for me, i.e. if I only had to parse a single flavor of WHOIS records,
>> instead
>> of five different flavors, like I have to deal with now.  But somehow I
>> suspect that the various people who work for all five of these Regional
>> Internet Registries might hold a somewhat different view on the matter.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20210626/f78e1e51/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Sun Jun 27 12:02:36 2021
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2021 15:02:36 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM
In-Reply-To: <CAHcb0ARM5VZzWV5XxzS1=m80rCTb-2MDA-FPO18q_PSBJV7wtQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
 <22919.1624534197@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
 <CAEqgTWZbPbFHq3RdogZNm85ffgWjuNeWq+fcpBaWBsFgs4nuGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHcb0ARM5VZzWV5XxzS1=m80rCTb-2MDA-FPO18q_PSBJV7wtQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWb1Hr9qdSaefy+GM35aoxvbeK3kqFt++aRhJYjJd3UNng@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Oga Ubah,

On Sun, 27 Jun 2021, 14:09 Anthony Ubah, <ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> NB: Series of "unemployment youths" are the architects of alot of the the
> present day(future) norms and innovation.
>

Exactly and you are spot on. But guess what, they need the Internet to
Innovate.

The Internet (In Africa) is made possible when an IPv4 Integer finds
residence on an Ethernet Network Interface Card #NIC with ports on some
Router in Abuja and a server in Luanda and a some firewall in Capetown and
that interconnected infrastructure  across this continent is profoundly
affecting all of us in different ways.

This is why I do not understand what my brother Paul is going on about and
I am trying to understand his view point because it does not make sense.

Shall AFRINIC resource members stop using IPv4 addresses to build real
Internet Infrastructure in AFRICA and just go about selling each IPv4
address (from their allocations) as a product for 30USD.?

Cheers
Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210627/3bef0e3b/attachment.html>

From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Sun Jun 27 18:47:09 2021
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2021 11:47:09 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWb1Hr9qdSaefy+GM35aoxvbeK3kqFt++aRhJYjJd3UNng@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <50489.1624819629@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <CAEqgTWb1Hr9qdSaefy+GM35aoxvbeK3kqFt++aRhJYjJd3UNng at mail.gmail.com>
Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>wrote:

>This is why I do not understand what my brother Paul is going on about and
>I am trying to understand his view point because it does not make sense.

I tried, in my usual long-winded way (which probably nobody bothered to
read) to explain what I think is the basic underlying viewpoint.

Capitalism has, in general, and over a long period of time, shown itself
to be a more efficient basis for the allocation of scarce resources.
And when I say "more efficient" I mean relative to the alternative,
which is to have some bureucratic "governmental" or "regulatory" authority
deciding who should get what, based on some criteria *other than* who
is willing to pay the highest price.

This is NOT a small point.  After 70 years, the old Soviet system which
was based on a so-called "command economy" which was run from the top
down, fell apart under its own weight, largely because it was so grossly
inefficient in the way it allocated resources.  And there are many other
and similar examples in history of "command economies" failing due to
the mis-allocation of resources, where that mis-allocation itself was
a product of nepotism, fraud, or just plain inept planning on the part
of the state bureaucrats who were doing the allocating.

So there is something to be said for just allowing what the economist
Adam Smith called the "invisible hand" of the free marketplace to guide
how scarce resources are allocated.

Pure capitalism may not work well in all circumstances, and it may fail
to produce just and equitable outcomes that make allowances for widely
endorsed social priorities (like keeping assests within some local region
or assuring that non-profit organizations are not starved to death),
but it is still usually preferable to having some uninvolved (and
possibly uninformed, and possibly crooked) bureacrat doing all of the
allocating of resources.


Regards,
rfg



From noah at neo.co.tz  Sun Jun 27 21:24:43 2021
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2021 00:24:43 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during
	AGMM
In-Reply-To: <7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7@delong.com>
References: <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
 <22919.1624534197@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
 <CAEqgTWZbPbFHq3RdogZNm85ffgWjuNeWq+fcpBaWBsFgs4nuGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7@delong.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWaLsumH1W+ogdv-_w8ji+MwkDOS3ewgDaNvRHzkNPiGFA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 11:57 AM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

>
>
> > On Jun 25, 2021, at 23:29 , Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
>
> > My question to AFRINIC, do your resource members justification for IPv4
> needs, include that of running IPv4 Leasing?
>
> Virtually every LIR leases addresses in one form or another.
>

I do not know of any LIR that leases addresses. But I know of LIR's across
this continent who provide services such as *Direct Internet Access, MPLS
services, Transit Services, Hosting Services, DNS services *and in order
for the LIR to deliver the service to a wide range of downstream customers
in AFRICA, they assign an IPv4 address to enable communication via Open
Systems Network Protocols..... AFRINIC Bylaws section 3.4 subsection (i).

3.4) The Company shall have, both within and outside the Republic of
Mauritius, full capacity to carry and/or undertake any business or
activity, including but not limited to the following objects:

   1. to provide the service of allocating and registering Internet
   resources for the purposes of enabling communications via open system
   network protocols and to assist in the development and growth of the
   Internet in the African region;

And Another reading for your Owen... please refer to the link below...

https://www.afrinic.net/community/783-isplir-guidelines


   - Regarding the ?cost? of IP addresses, AFRINIC informs the community
   that IP addresses are nobody?s property and cannot be sold as a commodity.
   We however do understand that some ISPs may charge some fee to offset any
   administrative overhead incurred as a result of assigning and managing IP
   addresses for their customers. We recommend that any such charges should be
   reasonable in comparison with the membership fees charged by AFRINIC.



> > Does AFRINIC have IPv4 brokers as resource members?
>
> Are you saying that an LIR who is also a broker is not entitled to
> membership for some reason?
>

Yes I am saying exactly that.... and again I will ask.

Do we have IPv4 brokers purporting to be an LIR (through membership) so
that they go about trading allocated IPv4 addresses for 30USD?  Was this
the Intention of those integers? to be traded as a commodity/product?
Because if that is the case, then how about all LIR just stop building
Internet infrastructure and we go about getting say 6 million IPv4
addresses from an RIR and slap 30USD and profit 1.8 billion on each address.



>
> > Because it seems to me that folk out here are arguing that IPv4 integers
> themselves are meant to be some product sold at 30USD.
>
> Whether you like it or not, whether I like it or not (and I?m not overly
> fond of it), the reality is that IP address registrations (not the
> addresses themselves, actually) are being bought and sold for ~30USD each
> every day all over the world.


The AFRINIC CPM in section 5.7 only refers to "IPv4 Resources transfer
within the AFRINIC Region".

There is no price tag and as such, I am not aware of the 30USD price in our
AFRINIC region.


> > My understanding was that the need for IPv4 was for the intergers to be
> used by the requester to number infrastructure for their networks/systems
> and their downstram customers/users so as to offer a wide range on
> services/products that Impact AFRICA's socio-economically and politically
> from, NREN, Higher Learning Institutions, Agriculture, ISP/Telecoms,
> Egovernment, FINTECH, SME's, Ecommerce (I know of unemployed youth
> leveraging the power of online platforms to forge a decent life and
> economically empower themselves through ecommorce, entertainment,
> influencers etc). The true digital transformation if you will.
> >
> > So I really need to understand what Paul is going on about to ascertain
> what I view as clear misunderstanding and misinterpretation of what AFRINIC
> is all about.
>
> Here?s where you lose me. I have tremendous difficulty connecting your
> mostly rational questions/statements above with this. Please point to the
> part of the bylaws,


https://www.afrinic.net/bylaws#b20-3

3.4) The Company shall have, both within and outside the Republic of
Mauritius, full capacity to carry and/or undertake any business or
activity, including but not limited to the following objects:


   1. to provide the service of allocating and registering Internet
   resources for the purposes of enabling communications via open system
   network protocols and to assist in the *development and growth of the
   Internet in the African region*


See the  BOLD line that talks about development and growth of the Internet
in the African region....

         iii. to *promote* responsible management of Internet resources
throughout the African region, as well as the *responsible development and
        operation of Internet infrastructures;   *

See the BOLD line that refers to the operation of Internet Infrastructure
.....


RSA, or CPM that constrains number usage to things which impact AFRICA
> socio-economically or politically.


Is it safe to say that growth of Internet in the AFRICAN region and the
operation of Internet Infrastructure in the AFRICAN region, has led to
African Governments to launch eGovernment Internet based platforms that
have led to better efficiency and management of public funds for instance
through the Government Mobile Money Payment Systems.(political). Tourists
today can apply for a travel VISA and pay online or via Mobile Money
through an online Department of Immigration Platform thereby improving
government efficiency.

Is it safe to say, because some of us took some BGP lessons from folks like
APB, PFS, MT, NG, Pokui, through AFNOG, that we are leading a decent life
and taking care of our families today, just like any other Internet or
Systems, Software Engineers on this continent because of the Internet which
has provided a lot of folks with employment.... (economics).

Is it safe to say that, folks out here, from artists posting creative
content on platforms, to ecommerce merchants on for instance Instagram, to
motorbike taxi apps (safeboda), to students studying online through edtech
platforms, to subsistence farmers in rural Africa whose lives are being
transformed through the smartphone, the Internet and mobile money, to
research and education networks, to the fintech etc.... to cut the story
short.


> I don?t recall seeing either of those terms in any of the three documents.
> It?s certainly not contained in section 6 of the bylaws.
>

Folks, who got what I meant, understood but I guess I have made my point
above.

You will never get it Owen.

Cheers,
Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210628/b7e8e949/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Sun Jun 27 21:38:08 2021
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2021 00:38:08 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM
In-Reply-To: <50489.1624819629@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
References: <CAEqgTWb1Hr9qdSaefy+GM35aoxvbeK3kqFt++aRhJYjJd3UNng@mail.gmail.com>
 <50489.1624819629@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWZCMexqJGkhhYH27TjvsF7KYxm5awVc3f_ogWHsrWv5Rw@mail.gmail.com>

Hey Ronald

On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 9:54 PM Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg at tristatelogic.com>
wrote:

> In message <
> CAEqgTWb1Hr9qdSaefy+GM35aoxvbeK3kqFt++aRhJYjJd3UNng at mail.gmail.com>
> Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>wrote:
>
> >This is why I do not understand what my brother Paul is going on about and
> >I am trying to understand his view point because it does not make sense.
>
> I tried, in my usual long-winded way (which probably nobody bothered to
> read) to explain what I think is the basic underlying viewpoint.
>

 I missed your previous email but I have since read it..... and to your
summarised points below.....


> Capitalism has, in general, and over a long period of time, shown itself
> to be a more efficient basis for the allocation of scarce resources.
> And when I say "more efficient" I mean relative to the alternative,
> which is to have some bureucratic "governmental" or "regulatory" authority
> deciding who should get what, based on some criteria *other than* who
> is willing to pay the highest price.


> This is NOT a small point.


I acknowledge and to that end, the regulatory authority being AFRINIC whom
some resource members turned brokers are saying, you don't have the
authority, but we do, and payment we make for membership has afforded us a
chunk of scarce resources that is priced at 30USD.



> After 70 years, the old Soviet system which
> was based on a so-called "command economy" which was run from the top
> down, fell apart under its own weight, largely because it was so grossly
> inefficient in the way it allocated resources.  And there are many other
> and similar examples in history of "command economies" failing due to
> the mis-allocation of resources, where that mis-allocation itself was
> a product of nepotism, fraud, or just plain inept planning on the part
> of the state bureaucrats who were doing the allocating.
>

And we have learned that "perhaps" with the right policies in place, folks
can be held accountable.


>
> Pure capitalism may not work well in all circumstances, and it may fail
> to produce just and equitable outcomes that make allowances for widely
> endorsed social priorities (like keeping assests within some local region
> or assuring that non-profit organizations are not starved to death),
> but it is still usually preferable to having some uninvolved (and
> possibly uninformed, and possibly crooked) bureacrat doing all of the
> allocating of resources.
>

The looting of public resources never stops since no system is perfect, but
with each lesson, we improve for the better.

We have seen looters fight to block policies that can improve
accountability.

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210628/94aa1f62/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Sun Jun 27 21:48:52 2021
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2021 00:48:52 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during
	AGMM
In-Reply-To: <45329.1624753494@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
References: <7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7@delong.com>
 <45329.1624753494@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWbzKxEqPNyN5RRMQ3v_OhP__xc1PksHf+n5_KfS6wbRbQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 3:29 AM Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg at tristatelogic.com>
wrote:

> In message <7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7 at delong.com>,
> Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>
> >Note that Ronald makes it clear that entities which have no nexus in the
> >AFRINIC service region should not be eligible for membership.
>
> Just to clarify, that's not exactly what I said.  I quoted the Bylaws.
> They say that one must have -both- a business footprint in the region
> -and- also must be providing some (unspecified) amount of service
> within the region.
>

The practise across the Internet is that, majority of the usage is
local/regional and a small % is outer-region to support expansion or
connectivity back into the region.

Pretty much all LIR in all regions operate at a local scale and a few with
massive economies of scale expand out especially the so called hyperscalers
and tier-1 providers so to speak.

Cheers
Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210628/d17eb975/attachment.html>

From owen at delong.com  Tue Jun 29 09:30:15 2021
From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 02:30:15 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during
 AGMM
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWaLsumH1W+ogdv-_w8ji+MwkDOS3ewgDaNvRHzkNPiGFA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
 <22919.1624534197@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
 <CAEqgTWZbPbFHq3RdogZNm85ffgWjuNeWq+fcpBaWBsFgs4nuGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7@delong.com>
 <CAEqgTWaLsumH1W+ogdv-_w8ji+MwkDOS3ewgDaNvRHzkNPiGFA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CF1BAB61-2242-4555-A96C-91E1903CCCC6@delong.com>



> On Jun 27, 2021, at 14:24 , Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 11:57 AM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com <mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Jun 25, 2021, at 23:29 , Noah <noah at neo.co.tz <mailto:noah at neo.co.tz>> wrote:
> 
> > My question to AFRINIC, do your resource members justification for IPv4 needs, include that of running IPv4 Leasing? 
> 
> Virtually every LIR leases addresses in one form or another. 
> 
> I do not know of any LIR that leases addresses. But I know of LIR's across this continent who provide services such as Direct Internet Access, MPLS services, Transit Services, Hosting Services, DNS services and in order for the LIR to deliver the service to a wide range of downstream customers in AFRICA, they assign an IPv4 address to enable communication via Open Systems Network Protocols..... AFRINIC Bylaws section 3.4 subsection (i).

Do you know of any of those LIRs that provide those services for free?

Do they pay their RIR fees out of charity, or do they recover those costs from their customers by charging some time-based fee for those services and/or any addresses provided with those services?

If they are charging a fee over time for addresses whether that fee is built into the price of other services or billed separately, then they are leasing addresses. Claiming otherwise shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the meaning of the term lease.

Are you really telling me that none of the LIRs you know charge extra for address allocations beyond some basic minimum in every tier of service they provide? Really? It?s an awfully common phenomenon outside of Africa. I admit I can?t point to a specific LIR in Africa which does, but this is primarily because I haven?t really priced such services in Africa as all of my infrastructure efforts in Africa have been on behalf of companies operating on a BYOA basis, usually bringing addresses into Africa from other regions. (For example, most Akamai infrastructure in Africa while I worked there was numbered using RIPE resources).

> 3.4) The Company shall have, both within and outside the Republic of Mauritius, full capacity to carry and/or undertake any business or activity, including but not limited to the following objects:
> to provide the service of allocating and registering Internet resources for the purposes of enabling communications via open system network protocols and to assist in the development and growth of the Internet in the African region;
> And Another reading for your Owen... please refer to the link below...

That talks about what AFRINIC can do. It does not create a limitation on what resource members can do with their resources.

> https://www.afrinic.net/community/783-isplir-guidelines <https://www.afrinic.net/community/783-isplir-guidelines>
> 
> Regarding the ?cost? of IP addresses, AFRINIC informs the community that IP addresses are nobody?s property and cannot be sold as a commodity. We however do understand that some ISPs may charge some fee to offset any administrative overhead incurred as a result of assigning and managing IP addresses for their customers. We recommend that any such charges should be reasonable in comparison with the membership fees charged by AFRINIC. 

This is true in every region. When a monetized transfer occurs, what is actually being sold is the rights in the registration of the IP addresses, not the addresses themselves.

Claiming to sell the addresses is akin to selling an exclusive right to 5. Integers can?t possibly be property. Otherwise, we?d have to prevent phone numbers from matching credit card numbers and we wouldn?t be able to reuse any fo those numbers for any other purpose, such as Social Security (Social Insurance, or whatever other countries call it if they have such a concept), Passport numbers, mathematical formulas, etc. Integers are used and reused every day and claiming to have any sort of exclusive ownership right in any set of them is patently absurd regardless of contractual language.

Notice that even in the language you have posted here (which is _NOT_ a binding policy document) makes a recommendation that such charges should be reasonable, but does not mandate same. This is a document which is not policy and which did not go through the PDP or any sort of approval by the membership. If you want to pretend it is binding policy, then you are supporting the idea that AFRINIC staff can make up policy as they see fit, which is a very bad and dangerous precedent to set.
 
> > Does AFRINIC have IPv4 brokers as resource members?
> 
> Are you saying that an LIR who is also a broker is not entitled to membership for some reason? 
> 
> Yes I am saying exactly that.... and again I will ask.
> 
> Do we have IPv4 brokers purporting to be an LIR (through membership) so that they go about trading allocated IPv4 addresses for 30USD?  Was this the Intention of those integers? to be traded as a commodity/product? Because if that is the case, then how about all LIR just stop building Internet infrastructure and we go about getting say 6 million IPv4 addresses from an RIR and slap 30USD and profit 1.8 billion on each address.

So let?s assume that a company operates a residential ISP in Botswana and also happens to be a registered broker trading addresses within policy in the ARIN, RIPE, and APNIC regions.

Are you saying that such an ISP should be banned from being an AFRINIC member merely because of their other business activities in other regions unrelated to their presence in Africa as an ISP?

This seems like a really bad idea from my perspective as I think AFRINIC would likely be subject to several serious legal challenges over such a situation. IANAL, but there are lawyers on this list and I invite them to comment if they don?t think such a prohibition would violate the companies act and most anti-trust regulatory frameworks in most countries.

> > Because it seems to me that folk out here are arguing that IPv4 integers themselves are meant to be some product sold at 30USD.
> 
> Whether you like it or not, whether I like it or not (and I?m not overly fond of it), the reality is that IP address registrations (not the
> addresses themselves, actually) are being bought and sold for ~30USD each every day all over the world. 
> 
> The AFRINIC CPM in section 5.7 only refers to "IPv4 Resources transfer within the AFRINIC Region". 
> 
> There is no price tag and as such, I am not aware of the 30USD price in our AFRINIC region.

Your lack of awareness does not mean that it is not happening.

> > My understanding was that the need for IPv4 was for the intergers to be used by the requester to number infrastructure for their networks/systems and their downstram customers/users so as to offer a wide range on services/products that Impact AFRICA's socio-economically and politically from, NREN, Higher Learning Institutions, Agriculture, ISP/Telecoms, Egovernment, FINTECH, SME's, Ecommerce (I know of unemployed youth leveraging the power of online platforms to forge a decent life and economically empower themselves through ecommorce, entertainment, influencers etc). The true digital transformation if you will.
> > 
> > So I really need to understand what Paul is going on about to ascertain what I view as clear misunderstanding and misinterpretation of what AFRINIC is all about.
> 
> Here?s where you lose me. I have tremendous difficulty connecting your mostly rational questions/statements above with this. Please point to the part of the bylaws,
> 
> https://www.afrinic.net/bylaws#b20-3 <https://www.afrinic.net/bylaws#b20-3>
> 
> 3.4) The Company shall have, both within and outside the Republic of Mauritius, full capacity to carry and/or undertake any business or activity, including but not limited to the following objects:
> 
> to provide the service of allocating and registering Internet resources for the purposes of enabling communications via open system network protocols and to assist in the development and growth of the Internet in the African region
> 
> See the  BOLD line that talks about development and growth of the Internet in the African region....

Yep? Let?s bold some other parts as well:
> 3.4) The Company shall have, both within and outside the Republic of Mauritius, full capacity to carry and/or undertake any business or activity, including but not limited to the following objects:
> 
> to provide the service of allocating and registering Internet resources for the purposes of enabling communications via open system network protocols and to assist in the development and growth of the Internet in the African region
This sentence talks only about the capabilities and limitations of what AFRINIC can do. It does not provide any form of restriction on the rights or abilities of members in how they utilize their resources.

>          iii. to promote responsible management of Internet resources throughout the African region, as well as the responsible development and          operation of Internet infrastructures;   

Again, this sentence governs actions by AFRINIC. It does not create a restriction or limitation on resource members of the organization.

> 
> See the BOLD line that refers to the operation of Internet Infrastructure ..... 

Yes, AFRINIC has a responsibility to promote the responsible development and operation of internet infrastructures. Note that the way that is written, there is a valid argument to be made that there is no regional restriction on this portion of the responsibility. The text is ambiguous at best. Nonetheless, I don?t think that AFRINIC should take on such a responsibility beyond its borders, but this does not represent any form of limitation or restriction on resource members, it represents an obligation for which the company (AFRINIC, Ltd.) is responsible.

> RSA, or CPM that constrains number usage to things which impact AFRICA socio-economically or politically.
> 
> Is it safe to say that growth of Internet in the AFRICAN region and the operation of Internet Infrastructure in the AFRICAN region, has led to African Governments to launch eGovernment Internet based platforms that have led to better efficiency and management of public funds for instance through the Government Mobile Money Payment Systems.(political). Tourists today can apply for a travel VISA and pay online or via Mobile Money through an online Department of Immigration Platform thereby improving government efficiency.

Sure, but that doesn?t change the fact that the bylaws, RSA, and CPM are silent on the issue of using AFRINIC resources out of region with the exception of addresses issued after the beginning of phase 2 of the soft landing policy.

> Is it safe to say, because some of us took some BGP lessons from folks like APB, PFS, MT, NG, Pokui, through AFNOG, that we are leading a decent life and taking care of our families today, just like any other Internet or Systems, Software Engineers on this continent because of the Internet which has provided a lot of folks with employment.... (economics). 

Sure, but how does that create any sort of limitation on what resource members can do with the resources they have been issued?

> Is it safe to say that, folks out here, from artists posting creative content on platforms, to ecommerce merchants on for instance Instagram, to motorbike taxi apps (safeboda), to students studying online through edtech platforms, to subsistence farmers in rural Africa whose lives are being transformed through the smartphone, the Internet and mobile money, to research and education networks, to the fintech etc.... to cut the story short.

No argument with any of those things, but I?m still not seeing how this provides any sort of reference to the bylaws, CPM, or RSA which creates any sort of regional restriction on where IP addresses can be used other than those issued after the beginning of soft landing phase 2.
 
> I don?t recall seeing either of those terms in any of the three documents. It?s certainly not contained in section 6 of the bylaws.
> 
> Folks, who got what I meant, understood but I guess I have made my point above.

No, you have pretty well proven that your argument has no basis in policy. It?s a nice bed time story and all, but nothing you have provided creates any sort of binding limitation on where a resource member may or may not use their resources.

> You will never get it Owen.

I?m pretty sure that I get it better than you think. I?m all for all of those things, but the current policies in AFRINIC do not impose the restrictions you are claiming. If the community wants such restrictions, then someone needs to bring forth a policy proposal that contains them and the community needs to come to a favorable consensus about it.

The last time this was attempted, the policy achieved quite some negative consensus and was eventually abandoned. It was certainly a valiant effort by the author and the few supporters it had, but nowhere near consensus.

I don?t even oppose such a policy, personally, if that?s what the community wants. I do think it would be short-sighted, likely unenforceable, and would have a number of unintended consequences (such as companies that currently number their infrastructure in Africa with resources from other regions suddenly choosing to become AFRINIC members and emptying the remaining free pool in favor of freeing those resources up to go elsewhere). However, if such a policy is proposed and gains significant support from the community, I would not personally attempt to stand in its way. I might argue against it or point out any flaws I see in it or any consequences I think it would bring, but I would not oppose it in a consensus call.

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210629/95ed8d2b/attachment.html>

From owen at delong.com  Tue Jun 29 09:41:39 2021
From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 02:41:39 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during
 AGMM
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWbzKxEqPNyN5RRMQ3v_OhP__xc1PksHf+n5_KfS6wbRbQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7@delong.com>
 <45329.1624753494@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
 <CAEqgTWbzKxEqPNyN5RRMQ3v_OhP__xc1PksHf+n5_KfS6wbRbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4CC7108E-C971-4B67-99AB-D401AEFA7C5D@delong.com>



> On Jun 27, 2021, at 14:48 , Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 3:29 AM Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg at tristatelogic.com <mailto:rfg at tristatelogic.com>> wrote:
> In message <7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7 at delong.com <mailto:7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7 at delong.com>>, 
> Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com <mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
> 
> >Note that Ronald makes it clear that entities which have no nexus in the
> >AFRINIC service region should not be eligible for membership.
> 
> Just to clarify, that's not exactly what I said.  I quoted the Bylaws.
> They say that one must have -both- a business footprint in the region
> -and- also must be providing some (unspecified) amount of service
> within the region.
>  
> The practise across the Internet is that, majority of the usage is local/regional and a small % is outer-region to support expansion or connectivity back into the region.

Nope? That?s far from common practice across the vast majority of multi-national companies with significant infrastructure around the internet.

For example, Hurricane Electric has a number of datacenter locations in Africa, but not one allocatoin/assignment from AFRINIC.

kiev:owen (142) ~ % whois -h whois.afrinic.net he.net                                                                                                                      2021/06/28 18:13:33
% This is the AfriNIC Whois server.
% The AFRINIC whois database is subject to  the following terms of Use. See https://afrinic.net/whois/terms

% Note: this output has been filtered.
%       To receive output for a database update, use the "-B" flag.

%ERROR:101: no entries found
%
% No entries found in source AFRINIC.

kiev:owen (143) ~ % whois -h whois.afrinic.net hurricane                                                                                                                    2021/06/29 2:32:41
% This is the AfriNIC Whois server.
% The AFRINIC whois database is subject to  the following terms of Use. See https://afrinic.net/whois/terms

% Note: this output has been filtered.
%       To receive output for a database update, use the "-B" flag.

%ERROR:101: no entries found
%
% No entries found in source AFRINIC.

When I worked there, Akamai had significant infrastructure all over Africa, but was not an AFRINIC resource member. They do appear to have
some AFRINIC space now, including a /30 and a /28 from PCCW in Nigeria now, but I?d hardly call that significant given the amount of infrastructure
they have on continent numbered from other RIRs.


> Pretty much all LIR in all regions operate at a local scale and a few with massive economies of scale expand out especially the so called hyperscalers and tier-1 providers so to speak.

No.

Maybe in Africa, but in most regions, there is a mix of global networks and domestic networks. Sure, the number of small network operators is greater
than the number of large ones, but the vast majority of addresses are in the hands of the larger global carriers and mega-ISPs.

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210629/72b0e65c/attachment.html>

From silber.mike at gmail.com  Tue Jun 29 10:19:26 2021
From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 12:19:26 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during
 AGMM
In-Reply-To: <CF1BAB61-2242-4555-A96C-91E1903CCCC6@delong.com>
References: <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
 <22919.1624534197@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
 <CAEqgTWZbPbFHq3RdogZNm85ffgWjuNeWq+fcpBaWBsFgs4nuGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <7DFE61F1-1FDE-4F53-AC41-B95D4CB4A9F7@delong.com>
 <CAEqgTWaLsumH1W+ogdv-_w8ji+MwkDOS3ewgDaNvRHzkNPiGFA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CF1BAB61-2242-4555-A96C-91E1903CCCC6@delong.com>
Message-ID: <54039702-37B2-429C-9377-A95EAA9E719E@gmail.com>

Hi Owen

> On 29 Jun 2021, at 11:30, Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <community-discuss at afrinic.net> wrote:
> 

In your hypothetical example

> So let?s assume that a company operates a residential ISP in Botswana and also happens to be a registered broker trading addresses within policy in the ARIN, RIPE, and APNIC regions.
> 
> Are you saying that such an ISP should be banned from being an AFRINIC member merely because of their other business activities in other regions unrelated to their presence in Africa as an ISP?
> 
> This seems like a really bad idea from my perspective as I think AFRINIC would likely be subject to several serious legal challenges over such a situation. IANAL, but there are lawyers on this list and I invite them to comment if they don?t think such a prohibition would violate the companies act and most anti-trust regulatory frameworks in most countries.

So, IAAL. I cannot see the basis for the legal challenge you are suggesting. I cannot see how such a prohibition would violate the Mauritian Companies Act - in particular because resource members are not members of the company, but exist in a grey area being members of the organisation, but not the company. In addition, seeing as no resource members can become members of the company - a prohibition on an entity becoming a resource member (or being expelled as a resource member) cannot be contrary to the Companies Act.

The Mauritian competition framework does not provide for extraterritorial jurisdiction - so I fail to see what basis there would be for any potential anti-trust action?

IMO the only action would be to ensure that the company complies with the Companies Act (and I don?t see how that would be an issue) and acts in accordance with its bylaws. 

In my view, the bylaws (read with validly passed policy) could validly restrict membership from entities that do not adhere to the policy / bylaws. It may not be practical or useful, but provided it follows proper process - I cannot see any basis for legal challenge.

Mike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20210629/4dcf181d/attachment.html>

From rfg at tristatelogic.com  Tue Jun 29 21:10:16 2021
From: rfg at tristatelogic.com (Ronald F. Guilmette)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 14:10:16 -0700
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during
	AGMM
In-Reply-To: <CF1BAB61-2242-4555-A96C-91E1903CCCC6@delong.com>
Message-ID: <8494.1625001016@segfault.tristatelogic.com>

In message <CF1BAB61-2242-4555-A96C-91E1903CCCC6 at delong.com>, 
Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

>I don't even oppose such a policy, personally, if that's
>what the community wants. I do think it would be short-sighted, likely 
>unenforceable...

I believe that LACNIC has a policy that IP resources granted must be
deployed at least 50% within the region.

I am not aware of them having any special difficulties enforcing that.

There may be reasons, perhaps even good ones, why such a policy would
not be appropriate within the AFRINIC region, but "enforceability" or
the lack thereof would not seem gto be one of them.



Regards,
rfg



From eddy at afrinic.net  Wed Jun 30 09:55:44 2021
From: eddy at afrinic.net (Eddy Kayihura)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 13:55:44 +0400
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM
In-Reply-To: <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
References: <17a3cef3a06.c4eb9e01197209.7059284685887196559@africaoncloud.net>
 <17a3d21fad1.bd552ba1206303.7060355078460728919@africaoncloud.net>
Message-ID: <8A6BB300-8C3D-4472-8F45-5167AE32A803@afrinic.net>

Mr Wollner,

I refer to your email dated 24 June 2021.

Questions 1 to 3 were addressed during the open mic session held on 4 June 2021 and we undertook an action to organise a webinar within 2 months to discuss with the community the definition of ?need-based? in the AFRINIC policies and bylaws.

We are delighted to see that the discussion amongst the community has already started.


Regarding question 4, we cannot penalise a staff member unless we find concrete proof of their involvement in the misappropriation of the IP resources. As of now, we do not have such evidence on any of AFRINIC?s current staff members. 

The appropriate channel for such inquiry or complaint is to submit it via our Whistleblowing <https://afrinic.net/whistleblowing> platform. 


Regards,

Eddy Kayihura

Chief Executive Officer,
African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC)
????????????????????.


M. Wollner,

Je me r?f?re ? votre courriel du 24 juin 2021.

Les questions 1 ? 3 ont ?t? abord?es lors de la session 'open mic' qui s'est tenue le 4 juin 2021 et nous avons entrepris une action visant ? organiser un webinaire dans un d?lai de 2 mois afin de discuter avec la communaut? de la d?finition de "need-based" dans les politiques et les statuts d'AFRINIC.

Nous sommes ravis de voir que la discussion au sein de la communaut? a d?j? commenc?.

En ce qui concerne la question 4, nous ne pouvons pas p?naliser un membre du personnel ? moins de trouver des preuves concr?tes de son implication dans la manipulation non autoris?e des ressources IP. A ce jour, nous n'avons pas de telles preuves sur aucun des membres actuels du personnel d'AFRINIC.

Le canal appropri? pour une telle requ?te ou plainte est de la soumettre via notre plateforme de whistleblowing <https://afrinic.net/whistleblowing>.


Cordialement,
Eddy Kayihura
Directeur g?n?ral,
African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC)




> On 24 Jun 2021, at 12:27, Paul Wollner <paul.wollner at africaoncloud.net> wrote:
> 
> Dear Chairperson,
>  
> Reference is made to the AGMM chaired by you on the 4 June 2021.
>  
> I wish to put on record that at the AGMM we were not given a reasonable opportunity to discuss and comment on the management of AFRINIC and in particular to the following issues:-
>  
> Question 1
>  
> AFRINIC claims that any change in the IP usage will require re-justifying the usage. Would it mean that, hypothetically, if I have a web customer on my server and they leave to be replaced with a VPN customer, will I need to seek AFRINIC?s approval first?
>  
> Question 1 was not discussed or commented upon
>  
> Question 2
>  
> The rest of the world enjoys a 30 USD/IP at a free open market. With AFRINIC having a transfer policy in place, will AFRINIC still demand any unused IP be returned to them for free?
>  
> Question 2 was not discussed or commented upon
>  
> Question 3
>  
> Out-of-region use was extensively discussed within the last decade, and it was a consensus that pre-soft landing space is allowed for out-of-region use. Yet, I heard that AFRINIC seems to be using bylaw 6.1 to manage other people?s resource usage. This is not part of AFRINIC policy and has, with good reason, never been approved by the community. Can AFRINIC clarify its understanding of out-of-region usage to the member base?
>  
> Question 3 was not discussed or commented upon
>  
> Question 4
>  
> Madhvi was in charge of the registration department when the IP heist happened ? this, at the very least, shows her incompetence, so why is she getting promoted instead of rightfully dismissed?
>  
> Question 4 was not discussed or commented upon
> 
> 
> 
> Paul Wollner
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> <Unaddressed queries - AGMM.pdf>_______________________________________________
> 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/20210630/f1b93c06/attachment.html>