Hello everyone, I would like to thank Mr Arthur for providing insight on the said meeting between Afrinic and other stakeholders, including the ICTA. I understand from the prompt clarification that the agenda of the meeting was to discuss IPV6 adoption in Mauritius solely.
I do believe that if the first email remained unattended, it would support an erroneous statement causing prejudice to Afrinic. It would therefore be a display of good faith if the parties involved acknowledge the understanding of the clarifications brought. I respect Afrinic's stance of neutrality towards the discussion is surely important given that the discussion involves a regulatory body and the Government of Mauritius. I further appreciate the statement of Afrinic's effort to advocate for an open and secure internet, which in itself is a proclamation. Kind regards, Chandish RK Daiboo. On Thu, 22 Apr 2021, 13:57 Ish Sookun, <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Arthur, > > Thank you for the answer. I appreciate you taking the time to reply. > > On 22/04/2021 12:47, Arthur Carindal wrote: > > By reading it, should I understand that you would like to know whether > > AFRINIC's meeting with the ICTA would have contributed to the adoption > > of this ICTA’s Consultation Paper on proposed amendments to the ICT Act > > for regulating the use and addressing the abuse and misuse of Social > > Media in Mauritius > > <https://www.icta.mu/docs/2021/Social_Media_Public_Consultation.pdf>? > > > > I wanted to know whether the regulation of Social Media content by the > ICT Authority without the intervention of the Social Media companies was > part of the initiatives discussed. > > > > > > > For your information, please note that on 22 February 2021, AFRINIC > > met ICTA in line with the framework of AFRINIC’s engagement with > > Internet ecosystem stakeholders, which include public organisations, > > civil society groups and private sectors. The said meeting was about the > > review of the adoption and deployment of IPv6 in Mauritius. Both parties > > seized this opportunity to foster initiatives to accelerate the > > effective deployment of this protocol on the government and operators > > networks to allow Internet users in Mauritius to take full advantage of > > the IPv6. > > > > Thank you for providing this information. > > > > > In the light of the above, AFRINIC has neither been consulted for nor > > participated in the elaboration of this consultation paper. > > Once again, thank you for this information as well. > > > Furthermore, please note that as the African Internet Registry, AFRINIC > > values its neutrality by refraining itself to interfere in the > > formulation of any national policies to be adopted by a government or an > > ICT regulator, which may be out of the scope of its mission. > > I recall this having been debated lengthily when the Anti-Shutdown > (AFPUB-2017-GEN-001-DRAFT-01) proposal [1] was published. > > > > > However, AFRINIC strives to advocate for a secure and open Internet > > (ref :https://afrinic.net/2017-04-05-keep-the-internet-open-to-all) > > > > Would AFRINIC envisage to reiterate the above in a public statement? > > To be more precise, I am asking whether AFRINIC would consider > publishing a public statement that AFRINIC advocates for a secure and > open Internet for all? > > Regards, > > Ish Sookun > > [1] https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2017/006503.html > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
