[rpd] Unaddressed queries by AFRINIC during AGMM

[Owen DeLong]

> On Jun 24, 2021, at 09:58 , Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com> wrote:

> 

> Hello

> 

> I didn't participate in the AGMM but talking about these subjects below which are common among other RIR I have the following notes to make:

> 

> - About Question 1 - Normally re-justifying is just if resources are known to be used for a different propose they have been used previously (e.g: resources justified for an ISP that became an End User). Also resources have rules to be used. Certain RIRs don't allow majority of resources to be used in a different region then the RIR one. It doesn't make sense have to re-justify just because you assigned addresses for your customers for different proposes (as long inside the current rules).

> 


I’m curious, which RIRs would those be? I know of no such limitation in any of the 5 RIRs other than the AFRINIC Soft Landing policy which applies to a relatively small fraction of resources issued by AFRINIC.

As to your last sentence, I agree with you, but I’ve had multiple clients approach me regarding AFRINIC demanding just that.

> However for instance: there have been cases in some RIRs of an Organization that assigns part of their prefixes to another organization where both are ASNs, have no connectivity and for that IP Space to be announced directly from the second ASN. This is a complete miss usage of IP space and shows that those addresses are not needed anymore by the resource holder and therefore they should be revoked as the resource holder doesn't justify to keep them anymore as they are not in used for what they have been justified.

> 


Is it? Can you point to the AFRINIC policy where this is prohibited? Can you point to such a policy in ARIN or RIPE?

I’ve studied this issue in some detail. You can point to such a policy in APNIC, but even there, it’s not ironclad. LACNIC has some language that could be interpreted either way.

> - About Question 2 - One thing cannot be confused with the other. If an organization has IP space that it doesn't use anymore it MUST return them to the RIR regardless how much that is worth. That IP space is not a properly of the organization, but simply is in custody of it , so it cannot keep it for years without usage - and if it doesn't justify anymore.

> What one may optionally do is to put it available for a transfer and in that way the resources will end up in another organization that truly justify and have need for them under the due process.

> 

You’re arguing both sides of the coin here. On one hand, you say you can’t keep the address for some amount of time (you used “years”), but on the other hand you say that you can transfer it rather than return it.

If you are allowed to transfer it instead of return it, then how long (and where is this governed in policy) are you allowed to work on arranging the transfer? Your answer of “not years” is neither sufficiently specific, nor is it present in policy anywhere.

> - About Question 3 - I don't think that out-of-region usage is a matter for AGMM or Board can decide upon. It is how  the CPM says it is and discussed and decided by this forum.

> Bylaws cannot regulate resource usage. There have been other situations where bylaws were used to mandate something it cannot done. It is not because it is written in the bylaws that is something valid.

> 

You still remain wrong about the extent and power of the bylaws, but that’s not really the issue here.
You are correct that the board and AGMM should not be deciding this, but they are a better choice than AFRINIC staff making it up as they go along (which is what is happening at the moment).

In fact, the issue of out-of-region use was raised in this forum by staff multiple times and one community member even took a stab a prohibiting out-of-region use with a policy proposal. It returned for several meetings over the course of 2-3 years IIRC before finally dropping into the annals of history as yet another bad idea that failed to gain consensus.

> However point 5.4.6.2 of CPM says: "AFRINIC resources are for AFRINIC service region and any use outside the region should be solely in support of connectivity back to the AFRINIC region." - therefore that seems very clear to me.

> 

Sure, but 5.4.6.2 is part of the soft landing policy and specifically refers only to resources that are issued after the beginning of soft landing phase 2. The question includes space that was issued prior to the beginning of soft landing phase 2, so this cannot be a complete answer.

> - No comments to make about Question 4.

> 

Noted with appreciation.

Owen


> Regards

> Fernando

> 

> On 24/06/2021 04:32, Paul Wollner wrote:

>> Dear Chairperson,

>>  

>> Reference is made to the AGMM chaired by you on the 4 June 2021.

>>  

>> I wish to put on record that at the AGMM we were not given a reasonable opportunity to discuss and comment on the management of AFRINIC and in particular to the following issues:-

>>  

>> Question 1

>>  

>> AFRINIC claims that any change in the IP usage will require re-justifying the usage. Would it mean that, hypothetically, if I have a web customer on my server and they leave to be replaced with a VPN customer, will I need to seek AFRINIC’s approval first?

>>  

>> Question 1 was not discussed or commented upon

>>  

>> Question 2

>>  

>> The rest of the world enjoys a 30 USD/IP at a free open market. With AFRINIC having a transfer policy in place, will AFRINIC still demand any unused IP be returned to them for free?

>>  

>> Question 2 was not discussed or commented upon

>>  

>> Question 3

>>  

>> Out-of-region use was extensively discussed within the last decade, and it was a consensus that pre-soft landing space is allowed for out-of-region use. Yet, I heard that AFRINIC seems to be using bylaw 6.1 to manage other people’s resource usage. This is not part of AFRINIC policy and has, with good reason, never been approved by the community. Can AFRINIC clarify its understanding of out-of-region usage to the member base?

>>  

>> Question 3 was not discussed or commented upon

>>  

>> Question 4

>>  

>> Madhvi was in charge of the registration department when the IP heist happened – this, at the very least, shows her incompetence, so why is she getting promoted instead of rightfully dismissed?

>>  

>> Question 4 was not discussed or commented upon

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> Paul Wollner

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> _______________________________________________

>> RPD mailing list

>> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>

> _______________________________________________

> 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/20210624/122d91bf/attachment.html>