Hi. Subject changed. used to be "Re: [rpd] More confusion from Noah" Also, this is not about resource policy development, so trying to move to community-discuss, as i think all participants are there.
On 10/07/2021 04:48, Owen DeLong via RPD wrote: >> On Jul 4, 2021, at 04:38 , Noah <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> 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: >> >> 1. to provide the service of allocating and registering Internet >> resources for the purposes of enabling communications via open ^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> system network protocols and to assist in the development and >> growth of the Internet in the African region; >> 2. to promote the representation of AFRINIC membership and the >> Internet community of the African region by ensuring open and >> transparent communication and consensus-driven decision-making >> processes; >> 3. to promote responsible management of Internet resources throughout >> the African region, as well as the responsible development and >> operation of Internet infrastructures; > > He didn’t skip it, [.......] on members. > > Not one of those sentences enables AFRINIC to exercise any form of > extraordinary control over the types of use of numbers other than > possibly the implied ability to reject utilization plans which clearly > violate applicable law. I'd like to disagree. I tried to highlight "the purposes" in above quote under 1. So AfriNIC has to check that allocated/assigned Internet resources are used (or going to be used) for *the purposes* ... of enabling communications .... [at allocation time, and optionally later] And I think it is legally implied to mean that this means used by the recipient (ie AfriNIC member) for these purposes. [1] And I believe that any AfriNIC member requesting resources does justify those by stating - I need the resources for these and these devices and services of my own (end user) or - I need the resources for some purposes of my own (infrastructure) and for this number and type of Internet connectivity customers and for this number and type of hosting services customers (LIR) And I trust that then AfriNIC assigns/allocates resources for these purposes to the member. [ And when the member (LIR) changes the specific service from dialup customer to DSL customer or from GPON customer to VM-hosting customer, then it would still fit under the above set of justifications. ] When a member however uses the resources for something else, NOT for providing their own connectivity or hosting services, not for sub-allocating to connectivity customers, but instead to other parties not getting these services from the member, then in my opinion, the member is not using the resources according to AfriNIC's mandate any more. And people have been frank in these lists before: then the member is using the resources only for the purpose of profit. And some members justify this by calling the resources (ie IPv4 addresses) *their assets*. I disagree. The resources were given to the member for *the purposes* of providing services by the member. I am sure you can read this in the justifications for the applications for the resources that we are all thinking about now. I know that I'm not entitled to see these, and that's fine. I think we all agree that for most LIR members the resources are given for commercial activities, of a for-profit company. But only as long as they are used for these activities of Internet connectivity or hosting services - in my opinion; and apparently not in the opinion of others. If an IPv4 address block was assigned/allocated to a member for a purpose - without transfer of ownership, then the member is in my opinion not entitled to give/sell/lease/allocate the same to another party. Can anybody advise how/when/where AfriNIC has handed that right to the member? I know some will say we are talking about integers, noone has the right to integers, ..... But: * we're talking about a set of 2^32 integers that have to have the property of being unique all around this Internet we try to keep working. * These integers need to be registered I want to clarify that I see and want to make a big difference between the narrow and wider interpretation of the word "purpose" which I'm so on about. Narrow purpose: I use these IPv4 addresses for a pool of 200 dialup customers in Dar es Salaam on a POP in Mikocheni. Wider purpose: I use these IPv4 addresses for any of my Internet connectivity services or hosting services (managed, VM, dedicated,...) in the network coverage area of this company. If the narrow purpose changes and the wider stays the same, I believe it is common understanding that a justification for the resources remains. If a use of resources changes from within the wider purpose to outside the wider purpose (ie gets no longer used by the member or its connectivity or hosting customers) - then I believe that the conditions for the allocation are no longer fulfilled. Basically, if the member to some extend is no longer in the business of providing Internet (connectivity or hosting) services, but in the business of selling IP resources, then they have confirmed they no longer have any justification for the IP resources they got as a member of AfriNIC. If it's just buying and selling of things (which they call assets, which I dispute), then they could as well speculate with other things like gold, real-estate, or any other commodity, rather than using some of those only 2^32 unique integers. Which are needed by others on this continent to provide internet services. I know this mail is too long. If I'm completely wrong, I welcome corrections. Or any other serious responses. Thanks, Frank PS: I trust anyone trying to commercialise IP resources received from an RIR (received for the purpose of providing services as justified) should know that there is a risk attached to this. PPS: Owen: > Not one of those sentences enables AFRINIC to exercise any form of > extraordinary control maybe it is ordinary control that AfriNIC is exercising. I don't know. [1] If I give you my car, without transferring ownership, to drive around Dar es Salaam as a taxi, and you are to give me a regular "membership fee", then you can not sell my car to someone in Armenia to drive around... Yerevan (and give you some more money so that you keep a lot and pay my "membership fee". _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
