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

[rpd] [Community-Discuss] Call for AFRINIC’s registry service migration to other RIRs

Fernando Frediani fhfrediani at
Thu Aug 5 20:29:17 UTC 2021

You may use the integers you wish, but if you don't have the
collaboration of most of others (the community) you will not get what
you want. Therefore the practical result will be null for you.

If any of other RIRs have in their database that specific block is to be
used by another organization most organizations will take that into
consideration and will filter you, therefore your decision (even if
backed by a unilateral decision of the Board of Staff of any RIR) to use
those integers will simply not work. That is the mechanism.

Don't need to go into much details of what a local court would rule,
because it is written there and they may have the power, etc, etc as in
practice it doesn't work just having it in the bylaws as community can
overwrite any Board of Staff decision in practice. The practice is: play
by the rules all others are playing (bottom-up process worldwide, ICP-2
(not just at the creation of the RIR), etc) and everything will work
fine for all.


Em 05/08/2021 17:17, Owen DeLong escreveu:



>> On Aug 4, 2021, at 18:15 , Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at

>> <mailto:fhfrediani at>> wrote:


>> Owen, you simplify too much things to direct them to something that

>> you may think is simple and easy, but it is not.


> I’m not saying it’s simple or easy. I’m saying that it’s nuanced and

> you are missing the nuances.


>> You can deny but in practice what Jordi and other of us say is

>> correct that resources is owned by community and that is in practice

>> simply because it is not enough that something specific is written in

>> certain in a bylaw document. If sudden one RIR believes it can do

>> whatever it likes with Internet Resources and all the other RIRs -

>> the community - think otherwise, then that RIR will NOT get what

>> those members wish, regardless what the bylaws say. It will not work.

>> They will lose.


> EVERY RIR says that the resources are not property, are not owned by

> anyone.


> Indeed, claiming title to integers is an absurd concept in that one of

> the basic concepts of property is a right to exclusive use. No RIR can

> deny me the use of 5 or any other integer, and no RIR can grant anyone

> any sort of exclusive right to any particular integer. It’s just not

> possible.


> What the RIRs can do is manage a registration database that uniquely

> maps entities to numbers and guarantees that those registrations do

> not map the same number to multiple entities in the database.


> Now as to ownership of the database, that’s more of a gray area,

> certainly. Are you claiming that this “community” somehow owns the

> database and therefore the bylaws governing AFRINIC’s conduct as a

> company cannot govern how it maintains and modifies the database?

> That’s an interesting claim and it would certainly have some unknown

> ramifications if you’re able to make such a claim stick. Novel theory

> in any case.


>> Therefore community collectively has the means (and the power) to

>> stop any unilateral act that is not favorable to the whole community

>> and so why there is a framework and a proper bottom-up process each

>> RIR MUST be bound to including adapting its own bylaws to THAT

>> reality and those principles and not the other way round. And if they

>> refuse to do those words in the bylaws will simply not be enough to

>> secure what they want in practice.


> By what mechanism and process do you imagine that these means and this

> power come to be?


>> Stop getting into less important details and focus on the practice

>> and reality of how the things really work.


> The details are important and they are how things really work. I’ve

> pointed to legal citations and citations of the bylaws to support my

> views.


> You’ve provided only your own conjecture and opinions on the matter

> which seem to be less and less connected to reality with each passing

> message.


> I am truly looking forward to whether you can get out of this corner

> you have now painted yourself into with any reality-based factual

> evidence to back your position.


> Owen


>> Fernando


>> On 04/08/2021 20:34, Owen DeLong via RPD wrote:



>>>> On Aug 4, 2021, at 01:44 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD

>>>> <rpd at <mailto:rpd at>> wrote:


>>>> Hi Owen,

>>>> If I create a company to handle you own personal assets, without

>>>> having been empowered by you to do so, that invalidates the

>>>> articles in the bylaws of my company.


>>> Well, it doesn’t invalidate them, but the company would never gain

>>> access to my personal assets in the first place. As such, this

>>> example does not apply to the current situation with the RIRs.


>>>> Will you agree on that?


>>> No. See above. The bylaws of the company remain valid, but the

>>> company lacks the ability or authority to obtain control of the

>>> assets in question.

>>>> The Internet Resources are from the community, not AFRINIC, not any

>>>> RIR (maybe it is slightly different in the case of ARIN, we know,

>>>> at least for the IPv4 ones). It is true that it is a complex legal

>>>> battle to dispute that. That’s why it is easier that the Board,

>>>> even if they need to consult with the membership, recognize the

>>>> mistake and resolve that. One way is ratifying the policy that they

>>>> decided not to.


>>> This is where our convenient use of imprecise (and even inaccurate)

>>> terms gets us into trouble. There are seriously nuanced issues here

>>> that require some clarification about the terminology we commonly

>>> use and the incorrect thought processes it creates.


>>> So please bear with me as I’m sure some of the things I say below

>>> will evoke negative reactions, but please do read through to

>>> understand the full context of my explanations. Try to keep an open

>>> mind and truly understand the deeper more nuanced way in which

>>> things are actually structured. It’s truly a beautiful thing because

>>> it simultaneously holds everyone accountable while avoiding any sort

>>> of super-powerful central authority. Most impressively, it creates

>>> very very few perverse incentives (at least up to the point where

>>> you start attaching dollar values to registrations).


>>> There is no such thing as “Internet Resources”. There are integers.

>>> Nobody owns integers. Nobody controls integers.


>>> There is such a thing as registrations of numbers for uniqueness

>>> among cooperating entities for a particular purpose.


>>> AFRINIC is one of the 6 cooperating entities that currently operate

>>> collectively as the central registration authority for a fiction we

>>> collectively refer to as “The Internet”.


>>> In reality, there is no organization or actual structure of “The

>>> Internet”, there is only a collection of independently operated

>>> networks who happen to use a common protocol and happen to agree on

>>> ways to exchange traffic and happen to agree on a common

>>> registration system in the form of the RIRs and ICANN.


>>> This is useful and convenient, but it carries no force of law and

>>> does not have any ability to grant rights or force behaviors. It

>>> can, of course, make its issuance or persistence of registrations in

>>> its database(s) contingent on compliance with a set of policies or

>>> rules set by a process determined by the organizations in question.


>>> The internet resources are NOT from the community, they are integers

>>> pulled from thin air. The registrations of those resources, on the

>>> other hand, are managed in a hierarchical manner and come originally

>>> from IANA (a function currently performed by ICANN) to the RIRs and

>>> then to LIRs, NIRs, and End Users. Those registrations are entirely

>>> under the control of the companies that operate the registries and

>>> are entirely subject to the bylaws thereof.


>>> If you do not like this, of course you are absolutely free to

>>> incorporate your own form of regional internet registry that gets

>>> its addresses from whatever source you desire and manages its

>>> registration database according to whatever policies your policy

>>> process you wish.


>>> Crafting the bylaws for such an organization will be very tricky

>>> business, but have at it if this is how you wish to spend your time.

>>> Another difficulty will be convincing anyone who controls a

>>> meaningful router to consider the registrations in your new registry

>>> valid, but I leave such things as an exercise for the reader.


>>> As a matter of fiduciary responsibility, the board simply cannot

>>> ratify the policy as written because it is, quite simply, not

>>> rectifying a mistake, but overriding the general structure of

>>> corporate governance and moving control of a membership corporation

>>> into the hands of an undefined group of people who may or may not

>>> actually have any stake in the company. To the best of my knowledge,

>>> this is not permitted under the laws of any country that I am aware.


>>> Perhaps such a thing is possible in Amsterdam, I don’t know. It is

>>> not possible as near as I can tell from my reading of the Companies

>>> Act of Mauritius. I’m pretty sure it’s not possible in the US.


>>> Owen



>>> _______________________________________________

>>> RPD mailing list

>>> RPD at


>> _______________________________________________

>> RPD mailing list

>> RPD at <mailto:RPD at>



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

More information about the RPD mailing list