Hi Owen, On 27/07/2021 19:09, Owen DeLong wrote: >> On Jul 27, 2021, at 00:26 , Frank Habicht <[email protected]> wrote: >>> It also serves more end users than the population of all of those >>> countries combined. What is your point? >> >> "serves" ...? > Yes.>> with connectivity? > > In some cases.
I'll just mentally insert the word "few" in there, because i haven't seen any yet. >> Or by "buying" IPv4 addresses one place and "selling"/leasing them >> another place. > > By providing a variety of services, some of which include IP address > management > independent of connectivity. "variety of services" So my first thought was to press <shift> and the key between v and n and then <shift> and the key between a and d gosh, at the risk of getting my hand slapped, just to make sure i'm understood : BS - bullshit! "IP address management" putting something into AfriNIC's Whois / IRR ? reverse DNS delegations? [ probably only at extra cost (wild guess) ] Using AfriNIC's auth DNS servers, by just updating domain: objects? >> this is to me closer to speculation than the stated intention of >> >> 1. the resource we take are using in africa. >> 2. we are investing in africa. > > We are definitely investing in Africa. That statement remains true. No doubt. Lawyers in Mauritius. > Regarding the former statement, things do change over time. Agree. Also validity of justifications of IPv4 space. I maintain this: - I have no idea how it was justified. - I have no right to see this justification. - I consider it likely that commitments have been made. - I consider it likely that not all were - and still are - fulfilled. > At the time the statement was made, it was true. I do currently believe that. > Today, the statement “many of the resources we received from AFRINIC are > being used in Africa” would be more accurate. I'm still not too sure about my English knowledge. Especially about "many". I generally encourage people to be as specific as possible. Can I interpret this as "more than three IPv4 addresses we received from AFRINIC are being used in Africa” ? >> which is a quote from >> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2014/004161.html > > Yes… It’s a 7 year old statement which was true at the time. And I believe so was the justification for IPv4 addresses - at the time. Currently, I believe that. That back then the justification was ok. >> and which I understand was good reason to receive IPv4 addresses. >> *was* >> when it was true. > > And today, a good reason to keep the addresses is: > We use the addresses to number internet connected hosts on our own and our > customers networks. "own network" ? I believe that in your home area it would be a very valid question to ask: "which AS is that?" (ie on nanog) "customers networks." "customer" certainly not in terms of connectivity. [ to be specific: for 99% of traffic towards these IPs [1], I hazard the guess that it doesn't pass through CI connectivity.] but "customer" instead only in terms of leasing IP addresses. which you (CI) got the right to do when getting them from AfriNIC in the first place??? I beg to doubt!!! And I think this is what it's all about. CI interpretation vs AfriNIC interpretation. And I think that latter is shared with a majority of the community. > This is a perfectly valid justification for addresses and there is no basis > in current policy to deny it and > it remains a true statement to this day. If it was a perfectly valid justification to provide addresses to CI's "customers" - without the "customers" receiving (for all the duration of the lease) any services but the lease of IPv4 addresses (not counting BS-"IP address management"), and with that fact (of leasing) being stated in said justification - and this accepted as justification at the time by AfriNIC, then I rest my case. Frank PS: sorry for the long sentence, it seems my mind turned "legal". [1] "these IPs": 2x /11 and 2x /12 _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
