[apnic-talk] Re: Forging and Integrating Equity and Democracy: Championing 'One Member, One Vote' for APNIC's Future

[Lu Heng]

Hi Barry:

in order to avoid everything you said, decentralize it, let each ISP own
their registration, no central power point, no power struggle.

We will not need any grace from anyone, there is no central power,
uniqueness guaranteed by everyone instead of one single organization.



On Sat, 19 Aug 2023 at 04:18, Barry Raveendran Greene 
wrote:

>
> I’ve heard your voice. The problem is that you are not taking time to
> understand any other voices.
>
> Go back to the beginning and understand why RIPE is set up around EU
> dynamics, why ARIN is set up around DC dynamics, and why APNIC is set up
> around APEC/ASEAN dynamics.
>
> Always remember, APNIC exist by the grace of civic society. ITU would love
> to create another department for RIRs controlled by the ITU membership. MII
> would walk in and take charge of your IP assets.
>
> Your myoptic hammering is not allowing other points of view, regional
> dynamics, respect for the hard work, and other important factors needed for
> effective policy discussion.
>
> Any by the way … my name is Barry.
>
>
>
>

-- 
--
Kind regards.
Lu
___
APNIC-talk - https://mailman.apnic.net/apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net/
To unsubscribe send an email to apnic-talk-le...@lists.apnic.net

[apnic-talk] Re: Why RIR at turning point of history and need reform

[Lu Heng]

Hi Barry:

I am a community member and also a member of RIR, I do not, and should not
require support from any government ministry for me to have my voice out.

While you and your friend enjoyed this unchecked power for too long, my
"agenda" has always been transparent here:

To eliminate the central power point of the internet.

The registration database should not be leveraged as a form of monopolistic
power towards any ISPs.

Central power points create opportunities for power hungry individuals and
organizations alike, to abuse such power and eventually tear the
internet apart.

decentralization is in everyone's interest, for the proposer of the
internet hundreds years to come.


On Sat, 19 Aug 2023 at 04:29, Barry Raveendran Greene 
wrote:

>
> On Aug 19, 2023, at 06:11, Lu Heng  wrote:
> 
>
> *I am simply ask you since when you have been given the rights to
> represents “the governments in APJ” and speak on their behalf?*
>
>
> You are doing your “attack the speaker twist” again. That is one of the
> types of on-line bullying that works to shut people up.
>
> No were did I say I represent a government. What I do is talk to them,
> work with them, and interact with them. I present to their forums, I lobby
> them, I invite them to APNIC and APRICOT meetings.
>
> We’ve had high level representatives show up a the APNIC/APRICOT forums.
> The same for NOGs over the years in different parts of the region.
>
> My wife use to live in these “Telecom Regulator World.” We’ve been in long
> discussions with ALL the past 6 ITU Secretary Generals. (Doreen is a
> personal friend).
>
> I don’t represent. I don’t need to represent to communicate to the APNIC
> Constituents to WATCH OUT for Mr Lu’s agenda.
>
> Based on my decades of experience in the region, what you are myoptically
> hammering for is a policy change that would trigger inter-government debate
> of the predictable representative governance of Critical Infrastructure.
>
> I don’t need to be a representative to express that concern based on my
> experience.
>
> As I mentioned before Mr Lu … go set up a meeting with your Ministry of
> Industry and Information Technology. Asked for their support for “one
> vote.”
>
> (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Industry_and_Information_Technology
> )
>
>
>
>

-- 
--
Kind regards.
Lu
___
APNIC-talk - https://mailman.apnic.net/apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net/
To unsubscribe send an email to apnic-talk-le...@lists.apnic.net

[apnic-talk] Re: Why RIR at turning point of history and need reform

[Barry Raveendran Greene]

> On Aug 19, 2023, at 06:11, Lu Heng  wrote:
> 
> I am simply ask you since when you have been given the rights to represents 
> “the governments in APJ” and speak on their behalf?

You are doing your “attack the speaker twist” again. That is one of the types 
of on-line bullying that works to shut people up.

No were did I say I represent a government. What I do is talk to them, work 
with them, and interact with them. I present to their forums, I lobby them, I 
invite them to APNIC and APRICOT meetings. 

We’ve had high level representatives show up a the APNIC/APRICOT forums. The 
same for NOGs over the years in different parts of the region. 

My wife use to live in these “Telecom Regulator World.” We’ve been in long 
discussions with ALL the past 6 ITU Secretary Generals. (Doreen is a personal 
friend). 

I don’t represent. I don’t need to represent to communicate to the APNIC 
Constituents to WATCH OUT for Mr Lu’s agenda. 

Based on my decades of experience in the region, what you are myoptically 
hammering for is a policy change that would trigger inter-government debate of 
the predictable representative governance of Critical Infrastructure. 

I don’t need to be a representative to express that concern based on my 
experience. 

As I mentioned before Mr Lu … go set up a meeting with your Ministry of 
Industry and Information Technology. Asked for their support for “one vote.” 

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Industry_and_Information_Technology)



___
APNIC-talk - https://mailman.apnic.net/apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net/
To unsubscribe send an email to apnic-talk-le...@lists.apnic.net

[apnic-talk] Re: Forging and Integrating Equity and Democracy: Championing 'One Member, One Vote' for APNIC's Future

[Barry Raveendran Greene]

I’ve heard your voice. The problem is that you are not taking time to 
understand any other voices. 

Go back to the beginning and understand why RIPE is set up around EU dynamics, 
why ARIN is set up around DC dynamics, and why APNIC is set up around 
APEC/ASEAN dynamics. 

Always remember, APNIC exist by the grace of civic society. ITU would love to 
create another department for RIRs controlled by the ITU membership. MII would 
walk in and take charge of your IP assets. 

Your myoptic hammering is not allowing other points of view, regional dynamics, 
respect for the hard work, and other important factors needed for effective 
policy discussion. 

Any by the way … my name is Barry. 



___
APNIC-talk - https://mailman.apnic.net/apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net/
To unsubscribe send an email to apnic-talk-le...@lists.apnic.net

[apnic-talk] Re: Forging and Integrating Equity and Democracy: Championing 'One Member, One Vote' for APNIC's Future

[Lu Heng]

Hi berry:

Your argument simply does not make sense.

One member one vote works very well in ARIN and RIPE, why it can not work
in Asian countries?

Why one member one vote will let PTA taking control? Pakistan alone does
not have enough vote to win anything.

I believe all NIR member should automatically be APNIC members with nominal
fee and also get one vote.

Every voice matters.



On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 at 02:53 Barry Raveendran Greene 
wrote:

>
>
> On Aug 17, 2023, at 17:25, Lu Heng  wrote:
>
> PTA DG came to an event specifically in support of my election for the
> contribution we are doing in Pakistan economy. And he specifically
> presented unfair resources distribution situation around the global.
>
>
> By PTA, I’m assuming you are referring to Pakistan. If yes, then that DG
> would know that the International Governance path for “significant change
> to the system” consultation would be through the APEC Telecommunications
> Ministerial meetings. That is not happening.
>
> Mr Lu, you really need to spend some time understanding the International
> Governance for Internet and Telecommunications.
>
> The ICANN, RIR, and LIR system is allowed to happen. A 51% vote in the ITU
> and each of those 51% countries can wipe out everything. Then your “1 vote
> per member” is trashed. The Internet would be under the direct authority of
> the local governments.
>
> What you get with 1 member 1 vote are organizations like PTA and MII
> taking over.
>
> Today’s Internet Governance models slowly evolved with consensus with the
> constituents (the people the LIRs represent), national telecom regulators,
> and international UN agencies.
>
> Read the consultations “like the Green Paper” discussion in APRICOT when
> IPs addresses and DNS TLDs were OWNED by the US Government.
>
> [image: APRICOT98.gif]
>
> ICANN History: "Green Paper" @ APRICOT 98 (Part One)
> 
> senki.org 
> 
>
>
> [image: APRICOT98.gif]
>
> ICANN History: "Green Paper" @ APRICOT 98 (Part Two)
> 
> senki.org
> 
>
> 
>
>
> --
--
Kind regards.
Lu
___
APNIC-talk - https://mailman.apnic.net/apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net/
To unsubscribe send an email to apnic-talk-le...@lists.apnic.net

[apnic-talk] Re: Why RIR at turning point of history and need reform

[Lu Heng]

Hi barry:

*I have not said anything regarding positions of any particular government.*

*You said“The governments in APJ would NOT tolerate what you are implying
as happening. “*

*I am simply ask you since when you have been given the rights to
represents “the governments in APJ” and speak on their behalf?*



On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 at 02:32 Barry Raveendran Greene 
wrote:

>
>
> “The governments in APJ would NOT tolerate what you are implying as
> happening. “
>
>
> Actually, Governments in Asia Pacific Regions are A-OK with APNIC.
>
> Just to be clear to the people eating popcorn and watching Mr Lu’s ranting
> with out homework ….
>
> The “governments” agencies in Asia who watch, participate, and send
> representatives to APNIC are the Telecommunications or Info-communications
> authorities. IMDA (https://www.imda.gov.sg/) would be a Singapore
> example. You can get a full list here
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_telecommunications_regulatory_bodies
> .
>
> Some of these region’s telecommunications regulators fund their LIRs (or
> another agency in the government). China would be one of them.
>
> While I don’t work for them, I interact with them in forms like APEC Tel.
>
> Mr Lu, you are saying that these governments with three decades of history
> with APNIC are now against? I know Singapore is not (had a meeting with
> some of the IMDA team about a possible event @ APNIC).
>
> Can you list of the Governments who would be upset?
>
> Start with MII. The current representative constituency model with RIRs to
> LIRs goes back to APNIC meeting #1 (in China) where CERNET expressed “we
> need to connect 10K Universities.” You are recommending to scrap that model
> and make every country in the region 1 vote - equivalent to each other no
> matter that size.
>
> I’m really interesting is this is true. Can you pull up the evidence that 
> “governments
> in APJ would NOT tolerate” the existing APNIC Governance structure?
>
>
>
>
>
> --
--
Kind regards.
Lu
___
APNIC-talk - https://mailman.apnic.net/apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net/
To unsubscribe send an email to apnic-talk-le...@lists.apnic.net

[apnic-talk] Re: Why RIR at turning point of history and need reform

[Lu Heng]

Hi Chris:

Again, none of your argument makes sense here yet again another
disinformation.

See inline:


On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 at 09:27, Christopher Hawker 
wrote:

> Lu,
>
> Simply disinformation, Ernest was not a system engineer, he was the senior
> policy person report directly to the CEO. While there is no official
> ranking among AFRINIC staff members, his seniority and the fact he is
> working as part of CEO office often he being seen as No.2 of the company.
>
> I base my statements on information from a South African news website
> called MyBroadband.co.za, stating that on 04 December 2019 MyBroadband
> published a report which presented "evidence that AFRINIC co-founder and
> engineer Ernest Byaruhanga had profited from the theft and sale of African
> Internet resources".
>

*While Ernest may or may not be an engineer, myboardband does not deny
Ernest being part of the management team, and you do, without any
credible source of information, hence disinformation. *

*He certainly was not an engineer for AFRINIC at time of the dismissal.*

Cloud innovation website shows original letter sent by AFRINIC a request
> monitoring all it’s IPs and report monitoring data back to AFRINIC, link
> provided below:
> https://regmedia.co.uk/2023/03/26/supplied_afrinic_to_ci_letter_27_aug_2021.pdf
> . You yet again separating disinformation.
>
> This letter does not depict the claim that Kayihura has or was inferring
> "power to monitor the entire continent's internet and police its content".
> If anything, the request for information is substantiated as AFRINIC held
> serious concerns (and rightly so) about IP resources in allocations to you
> were some 632 websites which related to "illegal gambling, illegal
> streaming of movies and other copyrighted content, or adult
> content/pornography sites, including some with indecent images of
> children". Any human with morals or even a shred of ethics would have
> immediately jumped to investigate and fully cooperate instead of claiming
> that they have no power to investigate concerns relating to how the IP
> resources are being used.
>

*We did the investigation, in fact because the allegation contains
potential child abuse content without providing any specific IP address, we
immedidately send AFRINIC a letter demand actionable information(i.e
specific IP address) in 6 hours for our customer(ISPs) to shut the end user
down.(again, all the orginial letter can be found at
https://cloudinnovation.org )*

*AFRINIC refuses to provide any website address or specific IP addresses.
Because there are millions of websites hosted in Cloud Innovation‘s
customer's infrastructure on thousands of networks across 60 plus
jurisdictions, Cloud Innovation simply does not have the legal authority or
capacity to act without proper abuse report.*

*And because Eddy admitted in court he knows child abuse website but refuse
to provide us actionable information, a police case filed by cloud
innvovation with relevent athorities on Eddy adding and abetting Child
abuse are still under investigation by athorities at this moment.*

*Future, with help of Domaintools and Detecon, LARUS committed it's own
research on public available website for it's IP under management, *

*here is the summary of that report:*


*c) Summary The evidence of manual verification of the statistical sample
can be found in Appendix H – Statistical Sample (Randomized) – VERIFIED.
During manual verification of statistical samples, no Child Pornography or
Terrorism-related websites had been identified.*

Who make you the god to demand members not to accept or believe what
> shared. I can say the exact same about you, just in this letter, you have
> demonstrated nothing said by you is true.
>
> No one or nothing makes me a god. I do not purport to be one in any way.
> Further, I do not demand that members not accept or believe what you say.
> Instead, I present the other side of the debate and members can make up
> their own minds. I also understand that many members may not know who I am
> therefore I reference my statements so as to maintain the credibility that
> I have.
>
> No. AFRINIC request down to per IP level, original request can be find in
> cloud innovation site.
>
> If they requested usage on a per-IP level, they had a very good reason for
> doing so. Based on the letter you referenced they had good reason to
> believe that IP resources allocated to Cloud Innovation were being used to
> disseminate abuse and other illegal material. This is strongly justified
> grounds for AFRINIC to launch an investigation into their use.
>
> First, management of IP address is outside of prerogative a RIR, certainly
> outside a bylaw
>
> It's actually not. If you become a member of an organisation and their
> policies state you cannot do something, you cannot do it. Don't like it?
> Don't request resources.
>

*IF I don't like RIR policy or RIR governance, as a member of the RIR and
community, I