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

Tue Jun 27 13:21:36 UTC 2017

On 27 June 2017 at 21:01, Boubakar Barry <boubakarbarry at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Jackson Muthili <jacksonmuthi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 3:12 PM, 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.
>>
>> 1. If there is nothing to hide there is no need to be afraid of audits.
>> 2. AfriNIC cannot be held ransom by legal threats from - let's face it
>> - a few individuals. AfriNIC is bigger than "a company with a /12" and
>> AfriNIC can claim the /12 back if breach and lack of compliance is
>> detected. There will always be threats to sue especially if some
>> individuals selfish interests have been quashed.
>>
>
> ++1.
>
> And I wouldn't have any problem AfriNIC being sued by people who are
> abusing the current process(es) and doing wrong things at the cost of the
> community. They will definitely lose.
>

Why they will lose? AFRINIC staff does not have legal training nor does the
community, how you sure the rule made by the community will be successful
in the word of law?

>
>
> What kind of behaviour is this? And look from where! If people are already
> threatening of suing AfriNIC because of this policy proposal, that means
> that they have things to hide.
>

Every one has something to hide, every business, every organization have
 sensitive information even forbidden to be shared by law, AFRINIC exist on
the condition of confidentiality, otherwise no one will ever provide any
information to AFRINIC.

It's not child play ground, it is real business with people doing it for
real value, no one is threatening suing AFRINIC, but if AFRINIC start
acting like internet police force, then people do something about it.

> Enough for me to support the policy even more than at the beginning.
>
> Boubakar
>

>
>
>
>>
>> -
>>
>> >  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://www.wacren.net
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> 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
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > RPD mailing list
>> > RPD at afrinic.net
>> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
>

-- 
--
Kind regards.
Lu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20170627/54b9b713/attachment-0001.html>