On Tue, 27 Jul 2021, 14:51 Anthony Ubah, <[email protected]> wrote:
> Didin't [email protected] already close this thread? > > Here's another bait email trolling the community. > Let Lili Au speak. What are you afraid of? Comms dont have the authority to close any thread. They only cautioned on violation of CoC. Noah > > *Best Regards,* > > *Anthony* > > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 5:45 AM Lili Au <[email protected]> wrote: > >> A funny discussion. Anyway, I saw many LOA that is CI authorise LARUS ( a >> Hong Kong company too) then LARUS authorise to their clients. Leo is >> correct. >> >> — >> >> > Frank Habicht <[email protected]>於2021年7月27日 15:32寫道： >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > did any of those make any commitment like "we are using these to connect >> > our customers in Africa" ? >> > >> > Did CI? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Frank >> > >> > PS: I count connectivity to a VM hosted by CI as ok, but not leasing >> > just the IP to an entity without providing them any connectivity. >> > >> >> On 27/07/2021 08:24, Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss wrote: >> >> If you think this is a shocking amount of address space, please >> consider >> >> the amount of space >> >> held by: >> >> >> >> Non-LIRs (end users): >> >> Hewlett Packard >> >> Apple Computer >> >> >> >> Unclear whether to classify as LIR or not: >> >> Amateur Radio (AMPR) >> >> >> >> LIRs: >> >> XFINITY/Comcast >> >> Verizon >> >> Akamai >> >> XO Communications >> >> Amazon >> >> Microsoft >> >> Google >> >> etc. >> >> >> >> The equivalent of 1.5 /10s (75% of a /9) is far less than any of the >> >> above organizations. >> >> >> >> Owen >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Jul 26, 2021, at 01:11 , Leo S <[email protected] >> >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi Ronald >> >>> Maybe your number is correct, whether it is 6.3M or 7M,This is a >> >>> shocking number for everyone especially in 201x such a large block >> >>> allocated. This is not in 199x year. >> >>> >> >>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 4:25 AM Ronald F. Guilmette >> >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> In message >> >>> < >> calm9cbn+r9oen9+9ybjfbk5ggtcmemz1yhxgdfw04otc3mx...@mail.gmail.com >> <mailto: >> calm9cbn%2br9oen9%[email protected]>> >> >>> Meriem Dayday <[email protected] >> >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> This is a direct violation of the CoC. >> >>> >> >>> No, actually, it isn't. >> >>> >> >>> The information about how Cloud Innovation is presently making use >> of >> >>> it's assigned 6,291,456 AFRINIC-administered IPv4 addresses is >> >>> effectively >> >>> public information, and it is not difficult to derive from any >> >>> number of >> >>> public sources (e.g. RIPEStat, bgp.he.net <http://bgp.he.net/>, >> etc.) >> >>> >> >>> If you lived in the time of Galileo Galilei, would you consider it >> an >> >>> affront to public decency if some people elected to look through >> the >> >>> telescope and then just describe what they saw? And if so, then >> what >> >>> is next? Book burning? >> >>> >> >>>> Disclosing such information and data without the company's >> >>> consent is a >> >>>> clear attempt of defamation and can have legal consequences on the >> >>>> concerned person. >> >>> >> >>> OK, let's parse that statement, because it conjoins two different >> >>> obvious >> >>> logical problems. >> >>> >> >>> First, the Internet is *not* a private network. Fact's about what >> >>> various >> >>> companies are doing on the Internet are possible to see, and to >> learn, >> >>> without needing the consent of the companies inolved. That is the >> >>> nature >> >>> of the Internet. If you want to run your own closed private >> intranet, >> >>> then go head. Nobody will stop you and you can then keep every >> last >> >>> detail of your corporate operations utterly secret. But the >> >>> minute any >> >>> company obtains Internet number resources and starts using those, >> it >> >>> *voluntarily* gives up some of its corporate secrecy in exchange >> >>> for being >> >>> a part of, and a participant on this great communications >> >>> experiment we >> >>> call the Internet. >> >>> >> >>> I personally am not now, and never have been a customer of Cloud >> >>> Innovation. >> >>> And yet even well before today I already determined for myself >> >>> that well >> >>> more that 90% of Cloud Innovation's assigned AFRINIC-administered >> IPv4 >> >>> address space was being deployed to other continents. This is not >> >>> a state >> >>> secret by any means, and the information may be derived from 100% >> >>> public >> >>> sources. Anyone clever enough to seek it out will find the same >> >>> information. >> >>> >> >>> Whether the manner in which Cloud Innovation is using/deploying its >> >>> assigned number resources does or does not comport with its >> specific >> >>> RSA and/or with community approved regulations is a separate >> question, >> >>> and one which I myself do not have an answer to. In any case, the >> >>> courts will sort out those questions in due course, I imagine. >> >>> But the >> >>> mere facts of how Cloud Innovation has deployed its >> AFRINIC-assigned >> >>> resources, or how it would appear to make money, based on the >> >>> available >> >>> public evidence, are *not* corporate secrets. Any attempt to >> portray >> >>> them as such is just an attempt at heavy-handed censorship. >> >>> >> >>> The second logical problem with the statement above is contained >> >>> in the >> >>> part that says "... attempt of defamation and can have legal >> >>> consequences >> >>> on the concerned person." >> >>> >> >>> Exactly so! If the guy who posted the material you are reacting >> >>> to was >> >>> willing to take the legal risk to post that material, IN SPITE OF >> the >> >>> possibility that he could, at least in theory, be sued for >> defamation, >> >>> then why are YOU worried about it? Why should AFRINIC be worried >> >>> about >> >>> it? Obviously, this (theoretical) possibility of a defemation >> lawsuit >> >>> is only a problem for the guy who posted the (allegedly) defamatory >> >>> text, and he obviiously was willing to take the risk in order to >> >>> express >> >>> his opinion, SO WHAT IS THAT TO YOU? >> >>> >> >>> Here again, shouting down in the original poster in this manner >> >>> appears >> >>> to me to be just another a heavy-handed attempt at pointless >> >>> censorship. >> >>> >> >>> I hope that we here can all have open and frank discusions of all >> >>> of the >> >>> issues now of concern to AFRINIC without these kinds of attempts to >> >>> muzzle dissenting viewpoints based on perfectly silly arguments. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Regards, >> >>> rfg >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Community-Discuss mailing list >> >>> [email protected] <mailto: >> [email protected]> >> >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >>> <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Community-Discuss mailing list >> >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
