Hi Owen, Not speaking about this case but in general, even not in the RIRs/Internet business (I make an equivalence in the parenthesis).
When there are obligations (here bylaws, RSA, policies), for providing a service (here resources), and the information provided by the "receiving party" is not according to those obligations/rules, but false or partial information is used to obtain those resources, and the time demonstrates that the provided information was untrue or incomplete, even if there was a staff mistake to provide those resources because the conditions were not sufficiently met, it is perfectly legal to cancel the service. There are examples of that in our environment: If I recall correctly, RIPE NCC has successfully got back resources from several LIRs that, for different reasons, have been in that situation. El 28/7/21 5:00, "Owen DeLong" <[email protected]> escribió: > On Jul 27, 2021, at 12:30 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via Community-Discuss <[email protected]> wrote: > > This will be very simple to resolve (not taking a position in one side or the other because I don't have all the real facts and documents). > > The original justificacion of the request of the resources I don't think it had so many "secret" and "confidential" details. After several years if any "secrets" were there, probably aren't longer something that can't published now. We have already agreed that the original justification is no longer relevant and that, like any ISP in business for more than 8 years, things have changed and we have adapted. > So why not CI, voluntarely publish that information? I don't have any stance on this game, but if I was CI, this will be the best way to probe my points. Because it is no longer relevant. > Otherwise, I will suggest that AFRINIC asks the court to incorporate that in the proceedings if is not there already, this way, whatever is the result of the case, everybody will know it. At least in the countries I know, the results of the cases are public, as well as the documents that were incorporated during all the process: transparency. In reality, even if a curative submission is required (if the last filed justification to which I do not have access, TBH), I would suggest they simply modify their justification to the following: We will use the addresses to number internet connected hosts on our own infrastructure and on our customers’ networks. This is a justification which meets the letter of the law of the policy and which does not preclude leasing. Owen ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it. _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
