Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

Re: [rpd] Afrinic policy proposal—Afrinic Service guild lines

Lu at
Sun Nov 23 11:58:38 UTC 2014

Both of you (Jackson and kofi) have no support ground and have no understanding of basic principal of the policy, so for two of you: none of your business! Unless your guys able to passing a policy force such disclosure, I guess you will never know the answer in a legitimate manner. So just stoping asking other people's business in a public mailing list.

> On 2014年11月23日, at 下午12:36, Jackson Muthili <jacksonmuthi at> wrote:
> Why is it you have big issue to disclosing your activities? Why they
> are so secret yet you ask two full /12??
> What are you hiding?
> Legitimate member in community are concerned because you seem to be
> siphoning Africa resources into China. No smoke with no fire.
> You already demonstrated your ability to lie in afrinic election at
> djibouti. This reason enough to believe you Lie to afrinic about your
> activity to grab two /12. Afrinic is right to be cautious on you.
> Yours is special case and board is right also to specially be advise
> of you.
>> On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Lu Heng < at> wrote:
>> Hi Alan:
>> I have confirmed it with almost every RIR staff, none RIR board should
>> be involved in member's allocation decision, however, following
>> sentence is what we receive directly in our ticket with Afrinic:
>> "In response to your follow-up call yesterday - your request is still
>> pending board decision. We
>> shall advise you of the same as soon as received."
>> And for the second part, you simply misunderstand what I said, of
>> course we will provide(and we did, our allocation request has been
>> pending for 10 months now!) document for Afrinic to review.
>> I am simply saying what we do and how we use our resource is not
>> people in this mailing's business(as people ware asking here what we
>> do in this mailing list). We have no obligation as well as no reason
>> to answer such question in a public mailing list.
>>> On 11/23/14, Alan Barrett <apb at> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2014, Lu Heng wrote:
>>>> My allocation has been told that under board decision for past 2 month.
>>> I am not aware of anything in the IPv4
>>> allocation policy, (AFPUB-2005-v4-001
>>> <>)
>>> that provides for review or decision making by the board.
>>>> And for whom ask about how and why we used up our allocation--simple
>>>> reply--none of your business.
>>> It is very much Afrinic's business to know how an applicant is
>>> using or plans to use their address space, so that they can check
>>> how much address space is appropriate, and whether policies have
>>> been followed.  Policies specifically require applicants to
>>> provide documentation of their network plans.
>>> For example, see the following parts of AFPUB-2005-v4-001:
>>> 6.5 Assignment
>>> ... Assignments must only be made for specific purposes documented
>>> by specific organisations and are not to be sub-assigned to other
>>> parties.
>>> 7.2 Conflict of goals
>>> ... IRs evaluating requests for allocations and assignments must
>>> carefully analyze all relevant considerations and must seek to
>>> balance the needs of the applicant with the needs of the Internet
>>> community as a whole. ...
>>> 7.3 Documentation
>>> In order to properly evaluate requests, an RIR must carefully
>>> examine all relevant documentation relating to the networks in
>>> question. Such documentation may include network engineering
>>> plans, subnetting plans, descriptions of network topology, and
>>> descriptions of network routing plans. All documentation should
>>> conform to a consistent standard and any estimates and predictions
>>> that are documented must be realistic and justifiable.
>>> 8.1 Introduction
>>> ... Determination of IP address space allocation size is the
>>> responsibility of AFRINIC staff.
>>> 9.1 Documentation
>>> The information required by AFRINIC to justify an end-user's
>>> IP address requirements include addressing needs, network
>>> infrastructure and future plans. Such information is required
>>> when an LIR is requesting IP space for their end-users at the
>>> time of sending in the request. In order to ensure that previous
>>> sub-allocation are not duplicated, the current address space usage
>>> is also required. This information is essential in making the
>>> appropriate sub-allocation approvals, and the level of detail will
>>> depend on the size of the request and complexity of the network.
>>> ...
>>> If it's an end user assignment, then in
>>> addition to the general requirements in
>>> AFPUB-2005-v4-001, the requirements in AFPUB-2006-GEN-001
>>> <>
>>> also apply.  They include:
>>> 4 Additional Assignment
>>> ... Requestors must show exactly how previous address assignments
>>> have been utilized and must provide appropriate details to verify
>>> their one-year growth projection. ...
>>> --apb (Alan Barrett)
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rpd mailing list
>>> rpd at
>> --
>> --
>> Kind regards.
>> Lu
>> This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above.
>> It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or
>> otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use
>> of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the
>> intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received
>> this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and
>> e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this
>> message and including the text of the transmission received.
>> _______________________________________________
>> rpd mailing list
>> rpd at

More information about the RPD mailing list