Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Two more petitioners
Omo Oaiya
Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net
Tue Dec 19 14:23:08 UTC 2017
Augustin,
I agree that #3 is sufficiently important to reiterate :-)
This is the raison d'etre of the SL-BIS proposal. The last /8 is all about
equitable distribution.
This has been emphasised over and over yet some seem to miss the point in
their objections
Omo
On 19 Dec 2017 2:38 p.m., "augustin kanyimbu" <augustin.kanyimbu at unikin.ac.
cd> wrote:
Andrew and Jackson,
upon reading all discussions I am sure that there is a big
misunderstanding, which could lead to conflicts, whereas you are playing on
the same ground. So, let me help you and make it clear:
Andrew, the facts Jackson is highlighting are as follow:
1) Internet penetration in Africa, except South Africa, is too low -
whatever your penetration rates, let'so throw them down -, the fact is
clearly known;
2) All African countries, poor or rich, have same rights to access to
Afrinic resources but, again, South Africa is far light years away from the
rest of 53 African countries. They are coming up, maybe slowly, and Afrinic
must provide them with a minimum of resources to let them start up whenever
one of them rise up from the darkness. A good management policy is where
anticipation and prevention are taken into account;
3) Afinic is a non-profit organization, this is why all countries are equal
and have same rights, especially in such a scarcity of IPV4, the fair way
of sharing would be providing to each country the same cut of beef, during
this transient toward the ipv6 environment... no place for selfish
attitude, nor for capitalism free market spirit!
3) Afinic is a non-profit organization, this is why all countries are equal
and have same rights, especially in such a scarcity of IPV4, the fair way
of sharing would be providing to each country the same cut of beef, during
this transient toward the ipv6 environment... no place for selfish
attitude, nor for the highest bidder in capitalism free market spirit!
4) Finally, as an African member, you stand all effort which can help
growing African internet access; that's fine! So let's preserve resources
for the so many next late comer countries.
Brother, forget any racial concept, let's go ahead, let's help our valuable
continent!
*Augustin K.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
KANYIMBU MUTOMBO Augustin
IT Manager & SYS. Administrator
+243 998124376 <+243%20998%20124%20376>
+243 848420937 | <Augustin.kanyimbu at unikin.ac.cd>
augustin.kanyimbu at unikin.ac.cd
| University of Kinshasa
| DRC, Kinshasa
2017-12-19 0:42 GMT+01:00 <rpd-request at afrinic.net>:
> Send RPD mailing list submissions to
> rpd at afrinic.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> rpd-request at afrinic.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> rpd-owner at afrinic.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of RPD digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Two more petitioners (Andrew Alston)
> 2. Re: Two more petitioners (Noah)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 21:55:54 +0000
>
> From: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> To: Jackson Muthili <jacksonmuthi at gmail.com>
> Cc: AfriNIC Board of Directors' List <board at afrinic.net>, rpd
> <rpd at afrinic.net>, "ceo at afrinic.net" <ceo at afrinic.net>
>
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Two more petitioners
> Message-ID:
> <DB6PR0301MB25193A849AD20A4A424ED1ACEE0E0 at DB6PR0301MB2519.eu
> rprd03.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
>
> While I am sorely tempted to respond point to point in your email and give
> you a lesson in facts - I will not dignify this nonesense with such.
>
> I will however say this - this is the second time you have introduced a
> racially biased context into the PDP - and discounted the will of a
> significant portion of the member base - based of blatant unsubstantiated
> and inaccurate prejudice
>
> Chairs - please can this be dealt with - this individual has already made
> accusations of Neo colonialism with no basis - and nothing was done - but
> enough is enough.
>
> Every member of Afrinic is equal in their right to be heard - be they
> black or white - South African or Egyptian or Congolese or Senegalese. The
> type of racial drivel and divisive language is what tears this community
> apart - and is totally intolerable.
>
> Consider this an official complaint about conduct
>
> Andrew
>
> Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
>
> _____________________________
> From: Jackson Muthili <jacksonmuthi at gmail.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 14:15
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Two more petitioners
> To: Andrew Alston <andrew.alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> Cc: rpd <rpd at afrinic.net>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Andrew Alston
> Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
> > As per attached
> >
> > _____________
>
> Extract of attached petitions in quotes below and comments therein
>
> > To: The AFRINIC POLICY DEVELOPMENT CO-CHAIRS
> > RE: IPv4 Soft Landing Bis
> > I, the undersigned, representing Afrihost SP hereby wish to state my
> clear and unambiguous
> > opposition to the IPv4 Soft Landing BIS proposal,
> AFPUB-2016-V4-001-DRAFT-07
> > I oppose this policy because I believe that the policy in its current
> form is harmful to the industry
>
> Can the opposer or the convener of the opposers explain the harm that
> will befall our dear industry?
>
> > and
> > irrespective of the motives of the authors, will have the effect of
> limiting the growth of Internet
> > penetration in Africa.
>
> According to various sources, about 13.5% of the African population
> has Internet access. While Africa accounts for 15.0% of the world's
> population, only 6.2% of the World's Internet subscribers are
> Africans. Africans who have access to broadband connections are
> estimated to be in percentage of 1% or lower.
>
> These metrics tell a compelling story about a continent whose internet
> is growing, but is still constrained through infrastructure, save for
> one country that is South Africa, where all the opposers or their
> convener appears to emanate. While their concerns are selfishly in the
> interest of their business landscape and interests, the situation in
> the other 53 countries is a far cry from the reality in South Africa.
>
> For the internet to continue to grow, they will need affordable means
> to acquire IPv4 address space for a considerable time in the
> foreseeable future. Even if the IPv6 argument holds true, we have
> argued on here that IPv6 is the future, yes, but Africa, South Africa,
> Americas and the others are still far from that IPv6 future. We would
> otherwise not be having this conversation.
>
> For the Internet to grow in Africa and for the unconnected to still
> get connected, the need to preserve IPv4 space in the registry and
> still make it available to both new and existing operators is as
> extremely critical as the need itself to get connected. I cannot see a
> better policy to assure this than this one.
>
> > I further believe that to lock space up in a manner that ensures that it
> will still be unused after the
> > rest of the world has moved to V6,
>
> If the rest of the world has moved to IPv6, AFRINIC will not have run
> out of IPv6 space to dole out to our communities and businesses. They
> will all just get IPv6 simple and easy.
>
> > thereby wasting a precious African resource until such a point as
> > it will be worthless is completely contrary to the interests of the
> African industry as a whole.
>
> The principle is to fairly distribute the resource in a period of
> scarcity, not to greedily dole it out to the wealthiest. Do not ignore
> the fact that AFRINIC serves a community of 54 African countries. It
> does not sell IP addresses in a capitalist free market system where
> the richest take it all at the expense of the poorer. If the resource
> ever becomes worthless, IPv6 would be up and running, and the
> continent wins. The issue is not the *worth* or *value* of the
> resource, but getting everyone connected. Do not lose the purpose of
> the argument.
>
> > Finally, I believe that this policy and its implementation are in direct
> conflict with section 3.4.ii of the
> > AFRINIC bylaws, which reads (with particular emphasis on relevant
> wording indicated):
> > (Under Types and Objects of the company)
> > 3.4 The Company shall have, both within and outside the Republic of
> Mauritius, full capacity to carry
> > and/or undertake any business or activity, including, but not limited
> to, the following objects:
> > 3.4.i To provide the service of allocating and registering Internet
> resources for the purpose of
> > enabling communications via open system network protocols and to assist
> in the development and
> > growth of the Internet in the African region.
>
> :-) no comment on this one
>
> anyhoo I realized last call passed. My thoughts to the petitioners and
> their convener are to show that the points in their signed document
> are, although plausible in a different context, are mostly immaterial
> for all intents and purposes of this proposal.
>
> I trust in good judgement of chairs as discussions progress.
>
> J
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/2017121
> 8/f9c49655/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 02:41:37 +0300
> From: Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
> To: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> Cc: AfriNIC Board of Directors' List <board at afrinic.net>, rpd
> <rpd at afrinic.net>, "ceo at afrinic.net" <ceo at afrinic.net>
>
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Two more petitioners
> Message-ID:
> <CAEqgTWb0Cf8CPACe5DEdEEkVfEeFvKFX0=R1eCGZhAdwetOTbw at mail.gm
> ail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
> Andrew
>
> Be specific, what exactly did Jackson say that "introduced a racially
> biased context." and in what way specifically has he made "accusations of
> Neo colonialism "?
>
> Noah
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 12:55 AM, Andrew Alston <
> Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
>
> > While I am sorely tempted to respond point to point in your email and
> give
> > you a lesson in facts - I will not dignify this nonesense with such.
> >
> > I will however say this - this is the second time you have introduced a
> > racially biased context into the PDP - and discounted the will of a
> > significant portion of the member base - based of blatant unsubstantiated
> > and inaccurate prejudice
> >
> > Chairs - please can this be dealt with - this individual has already made
> > accusations of Neo colonialism with no basis - and nothing was done -
> but
> > enough is enough.
> >
> > Every member of Afrinic is equal in their right to be heard - be they
> > black or white - South African or Egyptian or Congolese or Senegalese.
> The
> > type of racial drivel and divisive language is what tears this community
> > apart - and is totally intolerable.
> >
> > Consider this an official complaint about conduct
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> > Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
>
> > _____________________________
> > From: Jackson Muthili <jacksonmuthi at gmail.com>
> > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 14:15
> > Subject: Re: [rpd] Two more petitioners
> > To: Andrew Alston <andrew.alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> > Cc: rpd <rpd at afrinic.net>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Andrew Alston
> > Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
> > > As per attached
> > >
> > > _____________
> >
> > Extract of attached petitions in quotes below and comments therein
> >
> > > To: The AFRINIC POLICY DEVELOPMENT CO-CHAIRS
> > > RE: IPv4 Soft Landing Bis
> > > I, the undersigned, representing Afrihost SP hereby wish to state my
> > clear and unambiguous
> > > opposition to the IPv4 Soft Landing BIS proposal,
> > AFPUB-2016-V4-001-DRAFT-07
> > > I oppose this policy because I believe that the policy in its current
> > form is harmful to the industry
> >
> > Can the opposer or the convener of the opposers explain the harm that
> > will befall our dear industry?
> >
> > > and
> > > irrespective of the motives of the authors, will have the effect of
> > limiting the growth of Internet
> > > penetration in Africa.
> >
> > According to various sources, about 13.5% of the African population
> > has Internet access. While Africa accounts for 15.0% of the world's
> > population, only 6.2% of the World's Internet subscribers are
> > Africans. Africans who have access to broadband connections are
> > estimated to be in percentage of 1% or lower.
> >
> > These metrics tell a compelling story about a continent whose internet
> > is growing, but is still constrained through infrastructure, save for
> > one country that is South Africa, where all the opposers or their
> > convener appears to emanate. While their concerns are selfishly in the
> > interest of their business landscape and interests, the situation in
> > the other 53 countries is a far cry from the reality in South Africa.
> >
> > For the internet to continue to grow, they will need affordable means
> > to acquire IPv4 address space for a considerable time in the
> > foreseeable future. Even if the IPv6 argument holds true, we have
> > argued on here that IPv6 is the future, yes, but Africa, South Africa,
> > Americas and the others are still far from that IPv6 future. We would
> > otherwise not be having this conversation.
> >
> > For the Internet to grow in Africa and for the unconnected to still
> > get connected, the need to preserve IPv4 space in the registry and
> > still make it available to both new and existing operators is as
> > extremely critical as the need itself to get connected. I cannot see a
> > better policy to assure this than this one.
> >
> > > I further believe that to lock space up in a manner that ensures that
> it
> > will still be unused after the
> > > rest of the world has moved to V6,
> >
> > If the rest of the world has moved to IPv6, AFRINIC will not have run
> > out of IPv6 space to dole out to our communities and businesses. They
> > will all just get IPv6 simple and easy.
> >
> > > thereby wasting a precious African resource until such a point as
> > > it will be worthless is completely contrary to the interests of the
> > African industry as a whole.
> >
> > The principle is to fairly distribute the resource in a period of
> > scarcity, not to greedily dole it out to the wealthiest. Do not ignore
> > the fact that AFRINIC serves a community of 54 African countries. It
> > does not sell IP addresses in a capitalist free market system where
> > the richest take it all at the expense of the poorer. If the resource
> > ever becomes worthless, IPv6 would be up and running, and the
> > continent wins. The issue is not the *worth* or *value* of the
> > resource, but getting everyone connected. Do not lose the purpose of
> > the argument.
> >
> > > Finally, I believe that this policy and its implementation are in
> direct
> > conflict with section 3.4.ii of the
> > > AFRINIC bylaws, which reads (with particular emphasis on relevant
> > wording indicated):
> > > (Under Types and Objects of the company)
> > > 3.4 The Company shall have, both within and outside the Republic of
> > Mauritius, full capacity to carry
> > > and/or undertake any business or activity, including, but not limited
> > to, the following objects:
> > > 3.4.i To provide the service of allocating and registering Internet
> > resources for the purpose of
> > > enabling communications via open system network protocols and to assist
> > in the development and
> > > growth of the Internet in the African region.
> >
> > :-) no comment on this one
> >
> > anyhoo I realized last call passed. My thoughts to the petitioners and
> > their convener are to show that the points in their signed document
> > are, although plausible in a different context, are mostly immaterial
> > for all intents and purposes of this proposal.
> >
> > I trust in good judgement of chairs as discussions progress.
> >
> > J
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > RPD mailing list
> > RPD at afrinic.net
> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> *./noah*
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/2017121
> 9/e6dba728/attachment.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of RPD Digest, Vol 135, Issue 96
> ************************************
>
_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
RPD at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20171219/81fc3c12/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the RPD
mailing list