[rpd] Last Call for "AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT-04 - Internet Number Resources Review by AFRINIC"

Tue Jun 27 13:01:10 UTC 2017

Hi OMO:

Please refrain yourself from racist comment regarding specific race or
nationals. All people are equal in discussing policies and what matters are
policy itself. There is no geo-restriction on the policy discussion, and we
Chinese, have built large part of the network in AFRICA, many Chinese have
live in AFRICAN for years to help AFRICA to develop, to explore, as I said
once said to you in the meeting, one biggest mistake we Chinese make before
China surpass US became No.1 economy, is close our doors, China does not
have any exports or imports before the open door policy, and the open door
policy started in 80s make the whole nation rich and wealthy, in which I
firmly believe the same for Africans. More foreigner in the continent, for
investment opportunities means more job and better life for every one live
and breath here.

The legal threats are made by the very lawyer of AFRINIC, ashok, not by me,
I just make an example of it.

Yes, I am not lawyer, but as CEO of my group, I have group of lawyer works
for me, I just don 't see they are needed here, we are making policy, not
law, but if you like, I am happy to have my legal to publish an legal
overview of the matter as the second option to the current legal review.

And I am not speaking for Kris, as I understand he responsible for future
member fee calculation so he should have enough knowledge about the budget.

And yes, book keeper do audit, but such audit not including taking away
your assets, that's to be done in court. And I didn't say RIR should be
book keeper, Rob, funder of the RIR system, said that, I am just a firm
believer.

The policy pass on a  basis all major argument have been addressees, for
example:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2013-03

Every single argument have an counter argument in order to reach consensus,
what I see here is, Authors and you keep saying "we have discussed this" as
counter argument, in which does not stand by itself, even it has been
discussed, but you fail to provide an valid counter argument, the
discussion still need to be going on and the policy can not be passed until
every single one of them being addressed.

As far as I can see, none of major argument have been addresses, you didn't
provide solution for the potential lawsuit, you keep saying people
shouldn't be worrying if they obey the policy, seriously, it's not member I
am worried about, no one is afraid of AFRINIC, a 40 people company with few
million dollar budget, it is afrinic itself I am deeply worried, as one of
largest member of AFINIC, I have every intention for it's being long live
and prosper, and the proposal will damage the very company I care so much
about--AFRINIC.

On 27 June 2017 at 20:12, Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> wrote:

> Lu,
>
> I am uncomfortable with the increased Chinese presence on this matter Lu.
>   It seems to me that “substantial opposition” is being drummed up so this
> does not pass.
>
> I am also uncomfortable with the repeated legal threats which in my
> opinion have no basis if the fundamental contract that governs the
> relationship with members is violated.   Like I said,  we wait for legal
> and I’d be inclined to ask for a second opinion if what is clearly a
> straightforward matter is couched in a manner to frighten the community.
>
> I am also uncomfortable with you speaking for Kris.  As far as I know, he
> could not have been "responsible for the budget calculation".  He was a
> board member not in the executive.  Perhaps he can speak up for himself and
> tell us how he does the budget for AfriNIC.
>
> You say AfriNIC is a book keeper.   At least we agree that their
> responsibility is to keep the books and audit is a necessary part of this.
> Is Lu Heng a lawyer?  I tire for the implied threats.
>
> My 0.02.
>
>
> I
>
> On 27 Jun 2017, at 13:01, Lu Heng <h.lu at anytimechinese.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Omo:
>
>
>
> On 27 June 2017 at 19:35, Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 27 June 2017 at 11:56, Kris Seeburn <seeburn.k at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I still stand opposed to the policy. People just call it an Andrew or
>>> liquid audit policy or a cloud innovations policy audit. Let’s not hide and
>>> get off with it.
>>>
>>> Kris
>>>
>>
>>
>> Are these people suggesting these organisations have something to hide?
>>
>> I don't see how this policy can be an issue for any member who has not
>> violated the rules or abused contractual agreements with AfrINIC
>>
>
> 1. Because audit cost money and man power, audit an large organization
> like  national telecom require multiple times of AFRINIC budget, it is
> beyond what AFRINIC can afford, Kris is the one responsible for the budget
> calculation and he as already clearly states that.
>
> 2. Not fairly audit all members is direct violation of ICP-2, selective
> and subjective will results abuse of monopoly power lawsuit at first
> guidance.
>
> 3. Audit require sensitive business information in which no business would
> like to share,  moreover it is illegal to share in most cases, for example
> what if afrinic require member provide all customer data to justify
> utilization? It is in direct violation of privacy law in many countries.
>
>
>
>> Let's be a bit more accountable here.   Responsible stewardship requires
>> being able to audit and I understand that revocation is a last resort.  I
>> support the policy on this basis.
>>
>
> The ultimate question is, CAN AFRINIC afford revocation? yes, if you
> revoke a /22, the member may be too small to finding problem with you, but
> if you revoke a /12? Any company with a /12 have power to sue AFRINIC to
> broke. not mentioning the business damage and lost of the connections for
> the end user and business users, the address range alone worth 10-15
> million dollars in which effectively is 2 years of income for AFRINIC.
>
> Let's get into real world which has laws and high court in which ultimate
> have the real reenforce power with police and military to back what they
> are doing, AFRINIC has none, while you still ask AFRINIC to direct confront
> all it's members at 100 times its size, I just don't see that as realistic.
>
> AFRINIC is a book keeper, if you ask it to be police, then give it's the
> REAL power needed to be one, for example, pass a resolution at AFRICAN
> union.
>
>
>> More importantly, the policy is in last call and the authors have
>> responded to legal's message through the Co-chairs.  I look forward to the
>> Co-chairs feedback on that matter.
>>
>
> Any policy at last call receive substantial opposition go back to
> discussion phase for future discussion, in the last call does not means
> people can not push the policy back if they disagree it with rightful
> argument.
>
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>> --
>> Omo Oaiya
>> CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN
>> Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 <+234%20808%20888%201571> , +221 784 305 224
>> Skype: kodion <http:/>
>> http://www.wacren.net
>>
>> <http:/>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> Kind regards.
> Lu
>
>
>
> —
> Omo Oaiya
> CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN
> Mobile: +234 806 4522778 <+234%20806%20452%202778>, +221 784 305 224
> Skype: kodion
> http://www.wacren.net
>
>
>
>

-- 
--
Kind regards.
Lu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20170627/1012afb0/attachment.html>