> The objectives of AFRINIC below https://www.afrinic.net/bylaws#b20-3 > <https://www.afrinic.net/bylaws#b20-3> and the reason AFRINIC become the RIR > for AFRICA. > > 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: > 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; > 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; > to promote responsible management of Internet resources throughout the > African region, as well as the responsible development and operation of > Internet infrastructures;
Corporate objectives are not policy binding upon the company’s customers. They are a broad-strokes list of corporate goals. Nonetheless, even if they were, Cloud innovation meets a sufficient fraction of 3.4(i) to qualify. The Larus Foundation Fellowship Program is a significant effort towards 3.4(ii). You may not agree, but IMHO, Cloud Innovation does engage in 3.4(iii) through both its engagement with the community, it’s strict adherence to AFRINIC policies as written, and its internal policies requiring its address services customers to do the same. > As part of these over-arching contentions, Lu Heng has also actually or > effectively asserted that there are little or no binding requirements upon > AFRINIC resource members that they must operate or deploy their assigned > number resources in a manner which preferences any particular geographical > region. > > AFRINIC below https://www.afrinic.net/bylaws#b20-3 > <https://www.afrinic.net/bylaws#b20-3> > > 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: > 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; > 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; > to promote responsible management of Internet resources throughout the > African region, as well as the responsible development and operation of > Internet infrastructures; Once again, these criteria are a statement of corporate goals, not binding policy on resource members. Nonetheless, one does not need to use 100% or even most of ones resources within the region to fulfill all of those criteria and, IMHO, Cloud Innovation actually does meet each and every one of those criteria either directly and/or indirectly through actions of related parties. > I personally do not have sufficent information to judge whether he is > right or wrong about any of these contentions and so I reserve judgement. > > The courts shall decide. Indeed. So far, they seem to have decided that Larus has a good chance of succeeding. > He may perhaps be right, in which case it is NOT true to say that > "Afrinic resource are meant for {the} African region". And if that is > true, it may defy and fly in the face of many people's beliefs and > expectations, including mine, but beliefs and expectations are not > the law. > > The expectations > https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/new-rirs-criteria-2012-02-25-en > <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/new-rirs-criteria-2012-02-25-en> These are not expectations. They are the governing policies by which ICANN/PTI (acting as the IANA under the IANA functions contract) are able to accredit new RIRs. They are a set of requirements that ICANN must certify the RIR as meeting at the time of accreditation. Nothing more. > IANA did not allocate to AFRINIC so that AFRINIC allocates to Heng Lu who > would then go about leasing the resources in other regions. It really isn’t relevant what IANA thinks of any RIRs use or distribution of their address space. IANA’s role is limited to accreditation of new RIRs and the issuance of additional blocks from its free pool to RIRs as their free pools approach empty. For IPv4 this process is basically over, though there are still occasional quarterly trickles of returned space and other minimal chunks. > Why didn't Lu Heng go to APNIC, RIPE or ARIN. ? If his intention was to sell > IPv4 addresses in those regions for profit. To the best of my knowledge, other than a divestiture of addresses in the RIPE region 8+ years ago, neither Lu, nor Cloud Innovation has engaged in any sale of IPv4 addresses for profit. Like nearly all LIRs, Cloud Innovation has engaged in the leasing of addresses for profit. The main difference being that Cloud Innovation issues leases with or without connectivity services attached to the lease. > The law is the law, contracts are in writing, and the courts > are now tasked with figuring out who is in the right and who is in the > wrong. > > The RSA https://afrinic.net/ast/pdf/services/afrinic-rsa-en-201801.pdf > <https://afrinic.net/ast/pdf/services/afrinic-rsa-en-201801.pdf> > > 4. Conditions of service > (a) Where a member, receiving service under an existing agreement applies for > a change or a variation of the > type of such service which AFRINIC has been supplying to it, evaluation of > such a “change request” will be effected in > terms of the provisions of clause (2) of the present agreement. > (b) Cooperation: > (i) An applicant receiving service under an agreement is at all times bound > to provide to AFRINIC such > information, assistance and cooperation as may be reasonably required by the > latter in the provision > of the service. Which Cloud Innovation has done. > (ii) Such request for information may also be made where AFRINIC is > investigating (reviewing) the > applicant’s utilisation of the number resources already assigned to it. Which we answered. When they repeated essentially the same request without regard to our answers and then chose to threaten us rather than give due consideration to our answers, we sought to protect ourselves through the court system as any business facing such a threat likely would. > (iii) Failure by the applicant, to comply with a request made at above may: > (1) entail revocation or withholding of the service supplied by AFRINIC; > (2) be taken into account by AFRINIC in its evaluation for further and future > assignment or > allocation of number resources; > (3) lead to the closure of an LIR and termination of the agreement by AFRINIC. We did not fail to comply with the request. We replied to the first request with a complete answer. When the request was subsequently repeated, we referred to our earlier answer. When a threat was issued instead of considering our answer, it was clear that AFRINIC was not willing to consider its own policy documents binding and instead wanted to make up their own rules. At that point, it was necessary to seek injunctive relief, which we did obtain. Owen
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
