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

[Chevalier du Borg]

2017-06-27 18:34 GMT+04:00 David Hilario <d.hilario at laruscloudservice.net>:

>
>
> On Jun 27, 2017 10:02 PM, "Chevalier du Borg" <virtual.borg at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> 2017-06-27 16:17 GMT+04:00 David Hilario <d.hilario at laruscloudservice.net>
> :
>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>> Stewardship in maintaining an accurate registry.
>> Stewardship in ensuring the continuity of the organisation to facilitate
>> the distribution of Internet resources.
>>
>
>
> Stewardship also mean protecting the resources from plunderer  - shady
> company that pretends to be African, game the system and take IP addresses
> to use primarily outside Africa.
>
>
> As much as I would love to agree with you, no.
> The policies are what the steward must follow.
>
> There was a policy proposal to limit out of region use a while ago.
> It got rejected.
>



That was meant for legitime African companies wishing to use them abroad.
Am sure it does not apply to shady virtual shell companies with dubious
footprint in Africa.




>
>
>> Revocation of allocations by AFRINIC should never happen, allocations are
>> not assignments, they are not issued for a dedicated purpose, they are
>> registered to the LIR so that the LIR can further distribute the space as
>> they see fit within the scope of the policies.
>>
>
>
> Last time I was in AfriNIC training, I understand that resource
> (allocation or assignment) are hand out base upon NEED. When that need can
> no longer be justify, the resources must be reclaim.
>
>
> Database objects have a status attribute, it implies certain things.
>



Yes, like country code of a country where anyone can setup company in 3
hours.



>
> Allocations issued to an LIR  so the LIR can issue resources to itself and
> it's customers, there are several flavours of status possible underneath
> your allocation, each with a specific meaning,
>
> Assignments, issued to a specific user/network for a specific purpose,
> where no further IP delegation to other  I parties is needed, when no
> longer in use the space returns to the issuer whether it is the RIR or a
> LIR.
>
> Sub-allocation, that space is issued to customers by an LIR, the customer
> needs to further delegate the space as assignments.
>
> Assignments will return to the LIR when no longer valid, not to the RIR.
>


I refer to origin contract between AfriNIC and first take of address block
(weather LIR or EU). That ALWAYS BASED ON NEED. When that need cannot
further be shown, AfriNIC can take back those address. In actualité, that's
what happen when AfriNIC close member who cannot pay.



>
> Now, it does not require lots of research  to find out that many
> organisations only have registered Sub-allocations with no assignments
> under these Sub-allocations, they are then all in policy violation...this
> is where we are and the danger they are all running by not following
> allocation > Sub-allocation > assignment hierarchy.
> Or straight up allocation > assignment once this policy proposal goes
> through.
>


Agree with you. And that is steel violation of policy. If there are no
consequence for violating policy, then AfriNIC should eliminate the policy
in the first place.


>
>
>
> --
> Borg le Chevalier
> ___________________________________
> "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat"
>
>
> Kind regards,
> David Hilario
>



-- 
Borg le Chevalier
___________________________________
"Common sense is what tells us the world is flat"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20170627/899e26dc/attachment.html>