Search RPD Archives
[rpd] [Community-Discuss] Who is the guarantor of AFRINIC
pan.afrikhan at gmail.com
Thu Apr 13 18:35:51 UTC 2017
Hello Brother Mike Silber,
That Kieren McCarthy Author writes mistakes that even in comments of that
bad article about the Afrinic, people have redicule the Afrinic and you can
see even the CEO of the Afrinic has made clarificarions to this McCarthy.
Even the article title very misleading and call him well known. Maybe he
should not write about the Afrinic anymore. This is bad image for our
Someone even saying we will be like North Korea and such bad articles dont
even give solution. African is a different place my brothers, let us solve
our challengew ourselves.
Why are you even supporting this McCarthy?
Kwazulu Techno Hubs
On 13 Apr 2017 9:21 p.m., "Mike Silber" <silber.mike at gmail.com> wrote:
Kieren McCarthy is a well known author and commentator on Internet issues.
He follows various lists.
This was a public policy proposal. Nothing to stop an external party from
picking it up.
So please don't impute the authors of the proposal just because someone
wrote an article.
On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 at 2:27 PM Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com> wrote:
> *English :*
> Dear member of the community, What is the aim of the authors and the
> initiators of this Article ???
> Do they have the right to share a process that has not yet been adopted
> externally, still coming from a member of the Board of Afrinic, is
> unacceptable, is there no longer any limit In AFRINIC, that the different
> leaders take their respononsibilities and remind to the order the indelices
> The name AFRINIC has been engaged in this article, even though the subject
> in question has not yet ratified by the community of AFRINIC or the BOARD.
> *French :*
> Chers membre de la communauté, Quel est le but visé par les auteurs et les
> initiateurs de cet Article ??? <https://www.theregister.co.uk/>
> Ont-il le droit de faire part d'un processus non encore adopté à
> l'extérieur, venant encore de la part d'un membre du Board d'Afrinic c'est
> innacceptable, n'y a-t-il plus de limite à AFRINIC, que les différents
> responsables prennent leurs respponsabilités et rappellent à l'odre les
> Le nom d'AFRINIC a été engagé dans cet article alors même que le sujet en
> question ne soit ratifié par la communauté d'AFRINIC ou par le BOARD.
> [image: Twitter] <https://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=theregister> [image:
> Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/VultureCentral> [image: G+]
> <https://google.com/+theregister> [image: LinkedIn]
> [image: Home] <https://www.theregister.co.uk/> Data Centre
> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/data_centre/> Software
> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/software/> Security
> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/security/> Transformation
> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/transformation/> DevOps
> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/devops/> Business
> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/business/> Personal Tech
> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/personal_tech/> Science
> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/science/> Emergent Tech
> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/emergent_tech/> Bootnotes
> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/bootnotes/> [image: search]
> Data Centre <https://www.theregister.co.uk/data_centre/> [image: Arrow]
> Networks <https://www.theregister.co.uk/data_centre/networks/>
> No more IP addresses for countries that shut down internet access Afrinic
> considers punitive policy for errant governments
> [image: reddit]
> [image: Twitter]
> [image: Facebook]
> [image: linkedin]
> 12 Apr 2017 at 19:54, Kieren McCarthy
> Governments that cut off internet access to their citizens could find
> themselves refused new IP addresses under a proposal put forward by one of
> the five global IP allocation organizations.
> The suggested clampdown
> will be considered at the next meeting of internet registry Afrinic in
> Botswana in June: Afrinic is in charge of managing and allocating IP
> address blocks across Africa.
> Under the proposal, a new section would be added to Afrinic's official
> rules that would allow the organization to refuse to hand over any new IP
> address to a country for 12 months if it is found to have ordered an
> internet shutdown.
> The ban would cover all government-owned entities and others that have a
> "direct provable relationship with said government." It would also cover
> any transfer of address space to those entities from others.
> That withdrawal of services would escalate if the country continued to
> pull the plug on internet access. Under the proposal: "In the event of a
> government performing three or more such shutdowns in a period of 10 years
> – all resources to the aforementioned entities shall be revoked and no
> allocations to said entities shall occur for a period of 5 years."
> The proposal was sparked by a recent increase in the number of complete
> nationwide shutdowns of internet service – something that has been a cause
> of increasing concern and ire within the internet infrastructure community.
> The start
> The trend started during the Egyptian revolution back in 2011 when
> authorities killed the entire's country web access
> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02/01/egypt_last_net_lost/> prior to
> a big protest march. Employees of ISPs and mobile phone companies reported
> troops turning up at their homes and pointing guns at their families in
> order to enforce the shutdown.
> Until then, many governments had assumed it was largely impossible to turn
> off internet access to their entire nation. Soon after, government
> departments educated themselves about AS numbers and internet routing and
> started using their power to set up systems that would allow them to order
> the shutdown of all networks from a central point.
> While some countries only used this ability in the more dire circumstances
> – riots or terrorist attacks – shutdowns quickly started being used
> preemptively and for political reasons.
> Bangladesh switched off
> its entire country's net connectivity prior to the sentencing of former
> government leaders for war crimes. Then Iraq started shutting down the
> entire country for several hours at a time in order to prevent exam
> While these were enormously frustrating, the shutdown typically lasted
> only a few hours. But then Cameroon decided to cut off the internet for
> weeks – and targeted specific communities. The country's southwest and
> northwest provinces were taken offline following violent protests: a
> decision that had a hugely damaging impact on its "Silicon Mountain"
> startup zone, and also took down its banks and ATMs.
> In India, the number and frequency of internet shutdowns has sparked a new protest
> movement and website <http://internetshutdowns.in/> that tracks them.
> The situation has grown so dire that the United Nations got involved and officially
> the practice at a meeting of the Human Rights Council back in July. Despite
> opposition from a number of countries – including China, Russia, India and
> Kenya – a resolution passed forbidding mass web blockades.
> The reality, however, is that there is nothing to prevent governments from
> shutting down the internet and very little anyone can do in the face of a
> determined push from the authorities.
> But now the techies are fighting back. The Afrinic proposal has been put
> forward by the CTO and the Head of IP strategy for Liquid
> Telecommunications – a large pan-African ISP – as well as the CEO of
> Kenya's main ISP Association. As such it is a proposal that many are taking
> "While the authors of this policy acknowledge that what is proposed is
> draconian in nature, we feel that the time has come for action to be taken,
> rather than just bland statements that have shown to have little or no
> effect," they wrote, noting that "over the last few years we have seen more
> and more governments shutting down the free and open access to the internet
> in order to push political and other agendas."
> Whether governments like it or not, they are reliant on the provision of
> IP address to expand their networks and digital economy, and Afrinic is the
> only organization that can realistically provide them. If the policy does
> get passed, it would almost certainly act as a strong deterrent for
> government ministers to shutting down internet access.
> But there are a wealth of problems with the idea, not least of which would
> be the determination of what represents an internet shutdown. The authors
> put forward a suggested definition:
> An internet shutdown is deemed to have occurred when it can be proved that
> there was an attempt, failed or successful, to restrict access to the
> internet to a segment of the population irrespective of the provider or
> access medium that they utilize.
> That wording is likely to be very heavily scrutinized. And it would
> require someone or group to make a determination that it has happened –
> which would likely become a politically charged decision. And none of that
> considers the fact that national leaders are unlikely to accept punitive
> terms being placed against them by a third party.
> In short, it is a huge political headache. But it may also be one that
> only the internet community is capable to taking on and winning. The next
> few months will see whether the 'net community in Africa is willing to take
> on the challenge for the greater good. ®
> Sponsored: Continuous lifecycle London 2017 event. DevOps, continuous
> delivery and containerisation. Register now
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD