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

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

Andrew Alston Andrew.Alston at
Wed Jul 12 13:34:16 UTC 2017


Considering the state of announcement of wacrens own space - which sat when I last looked at only 25% over a period of multiple years - despite requests from this community to explain how this is legitimate use of space (and considering the policies state that space must be used in a period of time way shorter than that) - I believe you would be in a better position than most to answer your own question, and I am eager to hear the reply as I am sure are many on this list


Get Outlook for iOS<>
From: Boubakar Barry <boubakarbarry at>
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 4:03:38 PM
To: David Hilario
Cc: rpd
Subject: Re: [rpd] Last Call for "AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT-04 - Internet Number Resources Review by AFRINIC"

I have a problem here: people (at least some) seem to not read before rushing to they keyboard with the same rhetoric.

Ornella wrote: "Last ressort at deregistering resources would only likely be in case of fraud as most members should be able to work with AfriNIC to redress issues (revealed by review).".

We are not here to analyse definitions of fraud as per RIPE, ARIN or whoever. Fraud is fraud and we just need common sense to understand that. To be very specific: if one does get resources from AfriNIC not for deploying infrastructure in the region as indicated at the time of the request but for speculative reasons, what would you call it?


On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 11:16 AM, David Hilario <d.hilario at<mailto:d.hilario at>> wrote:

This is not at all what is defined as fraud over there.

Fraudulent company registration papers, forged documents to do merger and acquisition are what is fraud.

And your definition of fraud here, would really be a far stretch.

I also do not believe IN a policy to rely entirely on the RSA.

Re-evaluation of resource is what this proposal here at AFRINIC is offering which is not offered at the other RIRs.

Now, I already asked from Seacom, but this is valid for any LIR on this list.

Who has not yet filled up allocations issued more than two years ago?

Any of you is in policy violation, as those resources should had been used up by now, any unused space from your allocations however small that is, should then be returned, there is no 3 months period that will fix that.

On Jul 12, 2017 7:01 PM, "Ornella GANKPA" <honest1989 at<mailto:honest1989 at>> wrote:

Hi David

That is exactly the point. RIPE NCC and ARIN do deregister if there is fraud. Wilful breach of the RSA is fraud. The policy makes that clear. Last ressort at deregistering resources would only likely be in case of fraud as most members should be able to work with AfriNIC to redress issues (revealed by review).

The fact that the process for fraud is not in their review policies does not mean they do not deregister. Neither does it mean that the policy formats have to be the same.

Honest Ornella GANKPA

Le 12/07/2017 à 11:04, David Hilario a écrit :

Hi Noah,

Just to make it clear in regards to the repeated comments trying to
justify this proposal by saying that RIPE NCC or ARIN are having a
similar policy and practice.

The video and the section where both ARIN and RIPE NCC are speaking:<>

At around 08:27:50 Andrea Cima from RIPE NCC
He goes on to explain that their reviews are called "ARC", and it is
to keep in touch and keep data up to data, registry data, that is the
contact details and so on.
Investigation, that is part of the "fraud".

08:29:50 Leslie from ARIN.
Explains the scope of their policy, they only Audit in Fraud cases
only deregister in case of fraud.

Neither the RIPE NCC or ARIN does a re-evaluation of the resources and
questioning how the LIRs are currently using their resources.
So, this was debunked at an AFRINIC meeting, I don't understand how it
is still being spread like this.

It is being ignored or forgotten by the people here on this list, but
already stated publicly by RIRs registration services managers
directly that it isn't within the scope of what they do.

If you want to say AFRINIC can do it like RIPE NCC, simply copy the
ARC procedure:<>

Non-intrusive review of LIRs information and contacts, no
re-evaluation of their ressources, no discrimination and categories,

No one can really have any objections to that review system, other
than the staff costs for it, but if done as a side project it should
not be a problem to review 1500+ LIRs within a 2 to 3 years time.

David Hilario

IP Manager

Larus Cloud Service Limited

p: +852 29888918<tel:+852%202988%208918>  m: +359 89 764 1784<tel:+359%2089%20764%201784>
f: +852 29888068<tel:+852%202988%208068>
a: Flat B5, 11/F, TML Tower, No.3 Hoi Shing Road, Tsuen Wan, HKSAR
e: d.hilario at<mailto:d.hilario at>

On 12 July 2017 at 11:30, Noah <noah at><mailto:noah at> wrote:

On 12 Jul 2017 9:47 a.m., "Bill Woodcock" <woody at><mailto:woody at> wrote:

18 Against:
"chenghn at"<mailto:chenghn at> <chenghn at><mailto:chenghn at>
Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at><mailto:Andrew.Alston at>
Bastein Li <bastienlee at><mailto:bastienlee at>
Christopher Mwangi <christopher.mwangi at><mailto:christopher.mwangi at>
David Hilario <d.hilario at><mailto:d.hilario at>
Derrick Harrison <derrick.harrison at><mailto:derrick.harrison at>
Douglas Onyango <ondouglas at><mailto:ondouglas at>
Kris Seeburn <seeburn.k at><mailto:seeburn.k at>
Lu Heng < at>< at>
Mark Elkins <mje at><mailto:mje at>
Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at><mailto:mark.tinka at>
McTim <dogwallah at><mailto:dogwallah at>
Mike Silber <silber.mike at><mailto:silber.mike at>
Nishal Goburdhan <nishal at><mailto:nishal at>
Noah <noah at><mailto:noah at>
S Moonesamy <sm+afrinic at><mailto:sm+afrinic at>
Saul Stein <saul at><mailto:saul at>

Hi Bill

on the contrary, I actually support the policy just like other folks which
is why it reached the last call. This policy would enable AFRINIC just like
ARIN,  RIPE NCC and other RIR to effect compliance.

So, the next question might be whether this is a winner-take-all vote, or an
assessment of whether a clear consensus exists.

We continue to trust the co-chairs who have guided us to this stage.


RPD mailing list
RPD at<mailto:RPD at><>

RPD mailing list
RPD at<mailto:RPD at><>

[]<>     Vérification des malwares<> effectuée

RPD mailing list
RPD at<mailto:RPD at><>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list