<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jul 27, 2021, at 12:00 , Arnaud AMELINA <<a href="mailto:amelnaud@gmail.com" class="">amelnaud@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="auto" class="">@Noah +10000....</div><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Le mar. 27 juil. 2021 à 18:41, Noah <<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz" class="">noah@neo.co.tz</a>> a écrit :<br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr" class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><br class=""></div><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 7:32 PM Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <<a href="mailto:community-discuss@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">community-discuss@afrinic.net</a>> wrote:<br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none;float:none;display:inline" class="">PS: I count connectivity to a VM hosted by CI as ok, but not leasing</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none" class=""><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none;float:none;display:inline" class="">just the IP to an entity without providing them any connectivity.</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none" class=""></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div>Where is your basis in policy for this?</div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Let me attempt to answer your fake question with links that show AFRINIC members from some of the 54 AFRICAN countries with real networks in AFRICA.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="https://bgp.he.net/country/KE" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">https://bgp.he.net/country/KE</a><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="https://bgp.he.net/country/TZ" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">https://bgp.he.net/country/TZ</a><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="https://bgp.he.net/country/ZA" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">https://bgp.he.net/country/ZA</a><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="https://bgp.he.net/country/NG" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">https://bgp.he.net/country/NG</a><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="https://bgp.he.net/country/MU" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">https://bgp.he.net/country/MU</a></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>You’re not answering the question I asked…</div><div><br class=""></div><div>What is your basis in policy for claiming that a VM is OK, but leasing addresses without providing connectivity</div><div>services is not?</div><div><br class=""></div><div>It’s simply not prohibited anywhere in policy.</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="">Or wait... I can not find this so-called LIR <b class="">Cloud Innovation Limited</b> with offices in Seychelles using this BGP tool.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><b class=""><a href="https://bgp.he.net/country/SC" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">https://bgp.he.net/country/SC</a><br class=""></b></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>And?</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">You try so hard to pretend with your alternative reality in your quest to defend Heng Lu and his IP ADDRESS SOLUTIONS business run under his subsidiary HongKong company Larus <a href="https://www.larus.net/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">https://www.larus.net/</a> </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">FYI... "AFRINIC has never approved any application for IP space for the purpose of leasing despite having received such requests." </div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>OK, so AFRINIC has repeatedly violated their own policies. Doesn’t change the question and doesn’t change the reality.</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div class=""><a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2021-February/003907.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" class="">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2021-February/003907.html</a><br class=""></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>Also, nobody in their right mind would submit an application with that kind of specificity. The following justification is perfectly</div><div>adequate and conforms to policy:</div><div><br class=""></div><div>We will use the addresses to number internet connected hosts on our own and on our customers’ networks.</div><div><br class=""></div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Cheers,<br class=""></div><div class="">Noah</div><div class="">PS: The ALLOCATION POLICY is linked to the AFRINIC BYLAWS which are both linked to the AFRINIC RSA.</div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>That’s correct. Now show me where, in any of those documents, connectivity is required to be provided in conjunction</div><div>with address resource services. If you can’t do that, then you’ve made my case.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>FWIW, I’m not saying that I like this situation, but I am saying that’s what the policies actually say. If the AFRINIC community</div><div>truly sought to prohibit out of region use or leasing, then they could easily propose and get consensus for policies that would</div><div>do so. There was an attempt at prohibiting out of region utilization several years ago. It met with substantial resistance for a</div><div>variety of reasons from virtually every segment of the community. It was eventually withdrawn by the authors without gaining</div><div>consensus. Nobody has ever even proposed a possible policy to prohibit providing address services without providing</div><div>connectivity services. Possibly because most people recognize that such a policy wouldn’t have much of a useful effect.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>There’s a very simple fig leaf that someone could use in case such a policy were passed:</div><div><br class=""></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Announce the aggregates (least specific prefixes) from a central site in the region.</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Reannounce the more specifics upon customer request, but heavily prepended.</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Have some minimal connection to each customer so that packets delivered to the aggregate</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>can be delivered to the customer if necessary.</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Customers maintain their other connections and have LOAs to multi home and announce their less specific</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>prefixes..</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Voila, now it’s not technically leasing without connectivity, but it might as well be. The less specifics are very unlikely</div><div>to pull in any significant traffic as they’ll be overridden by the more specifics advertised elsewhere (and/or the longer</div><div>AS Path for the more specifics). Obviously, the customers will hot potato their outbound traffic to their closest highest</div><div>bandwidth egress points rather than through the narrow pipe back to the “address service provider”.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Currently policy doesn’t require this pretense. If it does, I suspect it would get implemented as needed to comply.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Owen</div><div><br class=""></div></body></html>