Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC silent on mediation

[arnaud . amelina]

Humm ! Afrinic ne devrait même pas réagir à ces genres d'invitation. 
C'est trop facile de gifler une personne et après de l'inviter à une 
quelconque médiation. Cloud Innovation connaissait très bien le chemin 
de la médiation, avant de décider unilatéralement d'ester en justice une 
organisation qui lui donnait à manger, Parce qu'elle comptait sur ses 
muscles non ? Eh bien qu'elle aille jusqu'au bout, on verra qui gagnera.


C'est trop facile après avoir bloquer le compte d'AFRINIC avec pour 
objectif claire de déclencher la faillite d'AFRINIC et de revenir 
aujourd'hui demander une quelconque médiation. Les Dommages et Intérêts 
engendrés par votre action seront payés jusqu'au dernier centime.


J'invite le Board et le Staff d'AFRINIC à tenir bon jusqu'au bout, la 
victoire est au bout de l'effort. Bon courage à l'équipe juridique 
d'AFRINIC, vous étiez dans votre coin tranquille quand on est venu vous 
provoquer, alors continuez ils savaient ce qu'ils faisaient, mais comme 
ça va échouer ils reviennent demander une médiation en qualifiant les 
gens de manque de "leadership, de transparence et d'éthique" tout ce qui 
les caractérise eux-même. Je ne suis pas contre une médiation quand il y 
a un conflit, mais ce temps a été longtemps dépassé dans le cas de CI. 
Car en Afrique nous avons un Adage qui dit : "Même souris saoulée, 
connaît carrefour du Chat", ils ont osé, ils n'ont qu'à assumer jusqu'au 
bout.


Cordialement.

Arnaud


On 2022-06-28 18:40, tech wrote:

Cloud Innovation committed to confirm if AFRINIC agreed to participate
in our offer for private mediation.  The deadline for AFRINIC to
respond passed last night . Unfortunately, AFRINIC ignored the
non-conditional offer to enter into confidential negotiations to
settle the issues subject to on-going litigation and therefore we have
concluded rejected our offer of mediation.

The issues raised by Cloud Innovation, and other members of AFRINIC,
are of global importance and sitting down to discuss the issues would
have only benefited the world’s internet users. In any dispute, it
is normal for willing parties to enter mediation.

Cloud Innovation were disappointed that AFRNIC did not have the
decency to even acknowledge our open and transparent offer. Whatever
your view on the issues at hand, the failure to agree to mediation
illustrates a total failure in leadership, transparency and ethics. It
shows contempt of members, a reputation, and the spirit of the law. We
are very disappointed to have to share this news with you, but do so
in the spirit of transparency and openness.

Our full press release can be found at link
below:https://cloudinnovation.org/press-release4.html
___
Members-Discuss mailing list
members-disc...@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss


___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Cloud Innovation Ltd vs AFRINIC (SCR 5C/30/21) Court Update

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Nous ne sommes absolument pas surpris CEO Eddy, car nous n'avons jamais
douté de l'innocence d'Afrinic, et de son éventuel succès. Mais nous te
transmettons quand même toutes nos félicitations à ton équipe pour la
concrétisation de ce succès qui ouvre la voie aux autres qui viendront les
uns à la suite des autres.

Afrinic ! En Avant-->

--
Arnaud

Le mar. 15 févr. 2022 à 14:53, AFRINIC Communication  a
écrit :

> Dear Colleagues,
>
> I am pleased to share with you the ruling delivered yesterday, 14 February
> 2022, in the appeal case ref Cloud Innovation Ltd vs African Network
> Information Centre (AfriNIC) Ltd.
> https://afrinic.net/ast/case9-judgement.pdf
>
> This case was filed in response to a letter that AFRINIC sent to Cloud
> Innovation Ltd dated 10 March 2021 pursuant to the provisions of the
> Registration Service Agreement (RSA) whereby AFRINIC contended that Cloud
> Innovation Ltd was, and continues to be, in breach of the RSA.
>
> This appeal stems from Cloud Innovation Ltd’s application for Interim
> Injunction, which was initially granted in its favour on 29 March 2021, but
> then set aside by the Honourable Judge in Chambers on 07 July 2021. Cloud
> Innovation Ltd had appealed against that judgement, and the hearing took
> place on 27 January 2022.
>
> To put it simply, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Mauritius
> has, after having considered the arguments from both sides, dismissed the
> appeal. In other words, AFRINIC has won this appeal.
>
> No doubt, this is an essential milestone for AFRINIC, and we wish to thank
> the team and our stakeholders for their continued support.
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
>
> Eddy Kayihura,
> Chief Executive Officer,
> African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC)
> c...@afrinic.net
>
>
> …..
>
>
> Chers collègues,
>
> J'ai le plaisir de vous faire part de ce jugement rendu hier, 14 février
> 2022, dans l'affaire en appel réf Cloud Innovation Ltd vs African Network
> Information Centre (AfriNIC) Ltd.
>
> https://afrinic.net/ast/case9-judgement.pdf
>
> Cette affaire a été déposée en réponse à un courrier qu’AFRINIC a envoyé à
> Cloud Innovation Ltd en date du 10 mars 2021 conformément aux dispositions
> du Registration Service Agreement (RSA), dans lequel l'AFRINIC soutenait
> que Cloud Innovation Ltd était, et continue d'être, en infraction avec le
> RSA.
>
> Cet appel découle de la demande d'injonction provisoire de Cloud
> Innovation Ltd, qui a été initialement accordée en sa faveur le 29 mars
> 2021, mais ensuite annulée par l'honorable juge en chambre le 7 juillet
> 2021. Cloud Innovation Ltd a fait appel de ce jugement, et l'audience a eu
> lieu le 27 janvier 2022.
>
> En bref, la division d'appel de la Cour suprême de Maurice a, après avoir
> examiné les arguments des deux parties, rejeté l'appel. En d'autres termes,
> AFRINIC a gagné cet appel.
>
> Il s'agit sans aucun doute d'une étape essentielle pour l'AFRINIC, et nous
> souhaitons remercier l'équipe et nos parties prenantes pour leur soutien
> continu.
>
>
> Cordialement
>
>
> Eddy Kayihura,
> Directeur général,
> African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC)
> c...@afrinic.net
>
>
> ……..
>
>
>
> زملائي الأعزاء،
>
> يسعدني أن أشارككم الحكم الصادر بالأمس ، 14 فبراير 2022 ، في قضية الاستئناف
> المرجع Cloud Innovation Ltd vs African Network Information Center (AfriNIC)
> Ltd. https://afrinic.net/ast/case9-judgement.pdf
>
> تم رفع هذه القضية ردًا على خطاب أرسلته AFRINIC إلى Cloud Innovation
> Limited بتاريخ 10 مارس 2021 وفقًا لأحكام اتفاقية خدمة التسجيل (RSA) حيث
> أكدت AFRINIC أن Cloud Innovation Ltd كانت ولا تزال تنتهك RSA.
>
> ينبع هذا الاستئناف من طلب Cloud Innovation Limited للأمر المؤقت ، والذي تم
> منحه في البداية لصالحها في 29 مارس 2021 ، ولكن بعد ذلك ألغاه القاضي الموقر
> في الدوائر في 07 يوليو 2021. استأنفت Cloud Innovation Limited ضد هذا الحكم
> ، و عُقدت جلسة الاستماع في 27 يناير 2022.
>
> وببساطة ، فإن دائرة الاستئناف في المحكمة العليا لموريشيوس ، بعد أن نظرت في
> الحجج المقدمة من كلا الجانبين ، رفضت الاستئناف. بعبارة أخرى ، حازت AFRINIC
> على هذا النداء.
>
> لا شك أن هذا يعد معلمًا أساسيًا لـ AFRINIC ، ونود أن نشكر الفريق وأصحاب
> المصلحة لدينا على دعمهم المستمر.
>
>
> أطيب التحيات،
>
>
> إيدي كاييهورا ،
> الرئيس التنفيذى،
> المركز الأفريقي لمعلومات الشبكة (AFRINIC)
> c...@afrinic.net
>
> ………..
>
> Caros Colegas,
>
> Tenho o prazer de partilhar convosco a decisão proferida ontem, 14 de
> Fevereiro de 2022, no processo de recurso ref Cloud Innovation Ltd contra
> African Network Information Centre (AfriNIC) Ltd.
> https://afrinic.net/ast/case9-judgement.pdf
>
> Este caso foi arquivado em resposta a uma carta que a AFRINIC enviou à
> Cloud Innovation Ltd com data de 10 de Março de 2021, em conformidade com
> as disposições do Acordo de Serviço de Registo (RSA) em que a AFRINIC
> alegava que a Cloud Innovation Ltd estava, e continua a estar, em violação
> da RSA.
>
> Este recurso 

Re: [Community-Discuss] Cloud Innovation Ltd vs AFRINIC (SCR 5C/30/21) Court Update

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi Dewole,

Is there any reason  to not celebrate?
Why do we look for lices in people’s hair when  there was no need for it?

I am sure when what you asked for will happen, CEO will make another
announcement and Whois will tell…

--
Arnaud

Le mar. 15 févr. 2022 à 15:04, Dewole Ajao  a écrit :

> Thanks for the update which you seem to be celebrating (if I read you
> correctly). For those like me who are legalese-challenged, does this mean
> that Cloud Innovation's resources are now effectively revoked? If I
> remember correctly, all of this started with a notice that resources were
> to be revoked at a certain date on the basis of non-compliance with
> the RSA, right?
>
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 3:53 PM AFRINIC Communication 
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Colleagues,
>>
>> I am pleased to share with you the ruling delivered yesterday, 14
>> February 2022, in the appeal case ref Cloud Innovation Ltd vs African
>> Network Information Centre (AfriNIC) Ltd.
>> https://afrinic.net/ast/case9-judgement.pdf
>>
>> This case was filed in response to a letter that AFRINIC sent to Cloud
>> Innovation Ltd dated 10 March 2021 pursuant to the provisions of the
>> Registration Service Agreement (RSA) whereby AFRINIC contended that Cloud
>> Innovation Ltd was, and continues to be, in breach of the RSA.
>>
>> This appeal stems from Cloud Innovation Ltd’s application for Interim
>> Injunction, which was initially granted in its favour on 29 March 2021, but
>> then set aside by the Honourable Judge in Chambers on 07 July 2021. Cloud
>> Innovation Ltd had appealed against that judgement, and the hearing took
>> place on 27 January 2022.
>>
>> To put it simply, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of
>> Mauritius has, after having considered the arguments from both sides,
>> dismissed the appeal. In other words, AFRINIC has won this appeal.
>>
>> No doubt, this is an essential milestone for AFRINIC, and we wish to
>> thank the team and our stakeholders for their continued support.
>>
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>>
>> Eddy Kayihura,
>> Chief Executive Officer,
>> African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC)
>> c...@afrinic.net
>>
>>
>> …..
>>
>>
>> Chers collègues,
>>
>> J'ai le plaisir de vous faire part de ce jugement rendu hier, 14 février
>> 2022, dans l'affaire en appel réf Cloud Innovation Ltd vs African Network
>> Information Centre (AfriNIC) Ltd.
>>
>> https://afrinic.net/ast/case9-judgement.pdf
>>
>> Cette affaire a été déposée en réponse à un courrier qu’AFRINIC a envoyé
>> à Cloud Innovation Ltd en date du 10 mars 2021 conformément aux
>> dispositions du Registration Service Agreement (RSA), dans lequel l'AFRINIC
>> soutenait que Cloud Innovation Ltd était, et continue d'être, en infraction
>> avec le RSA.
>>
>> Cet appel découle de la demande d'injonction provisoire de Cloud
>> Innovation Ltd, qui a été initialement accordée en sa faveur le 29 mars
>> 2021, mais ensuite annulée par l'honorable juge en chambre le 7 juillet
>> 2021. Cloud Innovation Ltd a fait appel de ce jugement, et l'audience a eu
>> lieu le 27 janvier 2022.
>>
>> En bref, la division d'appel de la Cour suprême de Maurice a, après avoir
>> examiné les arguments des deux parties, rejeté l'appel. En d'autres termes,
>> AFRINIC a gagné cet appel.
>>
>> Il s'agit sans aucun doute d'une étape essentielle pour l'AFRINIC, et
>> nous souhaitons remercier l'équipe et nos parties prenantes pour leur
>> soutien continu.
>>
>>
>> Cordialement
>>
>>
>> Eddy Kayihura,
>> Directeur général,
>> African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC)
>> c...@afrinic.net
>>
>>
>> ……..
>>
>>
>>
>> زملائي الأعزاء،
>>
>> يسعدني أن أشارككم الحكم الصادر بالأمس ، 14 فبراير 2022 ، في قضية
>> الاستئناف المرجع Cloud Innovation Ltd vs African Network Information Center
>> (AfriNIC) Ltd. https://afrinic.net/ast/case9-judgement.pdf
>>
>> تم رفع هذه القضية ردًا على خطاب أرسلته AFRINIC إلى Cloud Innovation
>> Limited بتاريخ 10 مارس 2021 وفقًا لأحكام اتفاقية خدمة التسجيل (RSA) حيث
>> أكدت AFRINIC أن Cloud Innovation Ltd كانت ولا تزال تنتهك RSA.
>>
>> ينبع هذا الاستئناف من طلب Cloud Innovation Limited للأمر المؤقت ، والذي
>> تم منحه في البداية لصالحها في 29 مارس 2021 ، ولكن بعد ذلك ألغاه القاضي
>> الموقر في الدوائر في 07 يوليو 2021. استأنفت Cloud Innovation Limited ضد هذا
>> الحكم ، و عُقدت جلسة الاستماع في 27 يناير 2022.
>>
>> وببساطة ، فإن دائرة الاستئناف في المحكمة العليا لموريشيوس ، بعد أن نظرت
>> في الحجج المقدمة من كلا الجانبين ، رفضت الاستئناف. بعبارة أخرى ، حازت
>> AFRINIC على هذا النداء.
>>
>> لا شك أن هذا يعد معلمًا أساسيًا لـ AFRINIC ، ونود أن نشكر الفريق وأصحاب
>> المصلحة لدينا على دعمهم المستمر.
>>
>>
>> أطيب التحيات،
>>
>>
>> إيدي كاييهورا ،
>> الرئيس التنفيذى،
>> المركز الأفريقي لمعلومات الشبكة (AFRINIC)
>> c...@afrinic.net
>>
>> ………..
>>
>> Caros Colegas,
>>
>> Tenho o prazer de partilhar convosco a decisão proferida ontem, 14 de
>> Fevereiro de 2022, no processo de recurso ref Cloud Innovation 

Re: [Community-Discuss] Update on the complaint lodged against AFRINIC at the Competition Commission of Mauritius

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi Jordi,

What does democracy have to do with this? each country has its rules and as
others said, AFRINIC and its lawyers should look for ways of disclosing
their submission on this case.

I do think Mauritius is more democratic than many countries on the
continent where you live… they just have some practices all may  not like.

--
Arnaud

Le jeu. 17 févr. 2022 à 15:49, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss@afrinic.net> a écrit :

> I fail to understand how is possible, that a resolution from a public
> Competition Commission is not public, even redacting personal data if
> needed. In normal democratic countries, as I know, all those cases are
> published in their web site.
>
> AFRINIC legal staff must take care of that.
>
> Regards,
> Jordi
> @jordipalet
>
>
>
> El 17/2/22 15:59, "Mike Silber"  escribió:
>
> Thanks Eddy
>
> There have been some interesting discussions on various lists
> regarding this issue.
>
> To the extent that AFRINIC can share any of its submissions to the CCM
> [which were obviously persuasive], this will be appreciated and could close
> off any future discussion.
>
> Regards
>
> Mike
>
> > On 17 Feb 2022, at 13:27, AFRINIC Communication 
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Colleagues,
> >
> > An anonymous complaint was lodged against AFRINIC in September 2021
> at the Competition Commission of Mauritius ("CCM") pertaining to alleged
> anti-competitive conduct on the part of AFRINIC with respect to the
> transfer of resources.
> >
> > The CCM had found no such restrictive business practice on the part
> of AFRINIC within the meaning of the Competition Act 2007; and the inquiry
> has been closed with no further action. This was documented in their letter
> dated 22 December 2021, Unfortunately however, we cannot publicly share the
> CCM’s letter.
> >
> > As a community driven membership based organisation, there are
> committees, working groups and processes set in place to address any issues
> that might need to be addressed.
> >
> > We shall continue to collaborate with all institutions, government
> or otherwise, and continue to deliver on our functions as responsible
> Regional Internet Registry.
> >
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> >
> > Eddy Kayihura,
> > Chief Executive Officer,
> > African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC)
> > c...@afrinic.net
> >
> > ………..
> >
> > Chers collègues,
> >
> > Une plainte anonyme a été déposée contre AFRINIC en septembre 2021
> auprès de la Competition Commission of Mauritius ("CCM") concernant un
> comportement anticoncurrentiel présumé de la part d'AFRINIC en matière de
> transfert de ressources.
> >
> > La CCM n'a trouvé aucune pratique commerciale restrictive de la part
> d'AFRINIC au sens de la loi sur la concurrence de 2007, et l'enquête a été
> classée sans suite. Ceci a été documenté dans leur lettre datée du 22
> décembre 2021, mais nous ne pouvons malheureusement pas partager
> publiquement la lettre de la CCM.
> >
> > En tant qu'organisation basée sur l'adhésion et dirigée par la
> communauté, des comités, des groupes de travail et des processus ont été
> mis en place pour répondre à toutes les questions qui pourraient être
> abordées.
> >
> > Nous continuerons à collaborer avec toutes les institutions,
> gouvernementales ou autres, et à remplir nos fonctions de Registre Internet
> régional responsable.
> >
> >
> > Cordialement,
> >
> > Eddy Kayihura,
> > Directeur général,
> > Centre africain d'information sur les réseaux (AFRINIC)
> > c...@afrinic.net
> >
> > .
> >
> > زملائي الأعزاء،
> >
> > يسعدني أن أشارككم الحكم الصادر بالأمس ، 14 فبراير 2022 ، في قضية
> الاستئناف المرجع Cloud Innovation Ltd vs African Network Information Center
> (AfriNIC) Ltd. https://afrinic.net/ast/case9-judgement.pdf
> >
> > تم رفع هذه القضية ردًا على خطاب أرسلته AFRINIC إلى Cloud Innovation
> Limited بتاريخ 10 مارس 2021 وفقًا لأحكام اتفاقية خدمة التسجيل (RSA) حيث
> أكدت AFRINIC أن Cloud Innovation Ltd كانت ولا تزال تنتهك RSA.
> >
> > ينبع هذا الاستئناف من طلب Cloud Innovation Limited للأمر المؤقت ،
> والذي تم منحه في البداية لصالحها في 29 مارس 2021 ، ولكن بعد ذلك ألغاه
> القاضي الموقر في الدوائر في 07 يوليو 2021. استأنفت Cloud Innovation Limited
> ضد هذا الحكم ، و عُقدت جلسة الاستماع في 27 يناير 2022.
> >
> > لا شك أن هذا يعد معلمًا أساسيًا لـ AFRINIC ، ونود أن نشكر الفريق
> وأصحاب المصلحة لدينا على دعمهم المستمر.
> >
> > وببساطة ، فإن دائرة الاستئناف في المحكمة العليا لموريشيوس ، بعد أن
> نظرت في الحجج المقدمة من كلا الجانبين ، رفضت الاستئناف. بعبارة أخرى ، حازت
> AFRINIC على هذا النداء.
> >
> >
> >
> > أطيب التحيات،
> >
> >
> > إيدي كاييهورا ،
> > الرئيس التنفيذى،
> > المركز الأفريقي لمعلومات الشبكة (AFRINIC)
> > c...@afrinic.net
> >
> >
> 

Re: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Cher Andrew, j'ignorais que tu es devenu avocat de Lu, félicitations. Bien
maintenant que tu sembles diffamé Noah en prétendant qu'il aurait traité
quelqu'un de "Criminel" sans preuve. Peut-il lui aussi t'esté en justice ?

Soyons raisonnable et laissons chacun défendre son cas. Et vos tentatives
de fermer la bouche aux membres membres de la communauté, ouvrira la mienne
et je ne ferai pas de cadeau à qui que se soit qui le mérite.

Noah tu as le soutien de la communauté entière, s'il le faut on cotisera
pour payer tes avocats comme on l'a fait pour soutenir AFRINIC. Ce qui fait
notre force est notre solidarité, à part quelques brebis galeuses qui
soutiennent les pourfendeurs de l'Afrique.

Nouvelle signature des messages.
--
"*je ne diffame personne*" lol

Arnaud

Le mar. 4 janv. 2022 à 19:51, Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss@afrinic.net> a écrit :

> Noah - I won’t entertain this thread any further because it’s not worth my
> time - let the legal system play out - and let the courts be the judge of
> your words on these lists.
>
> I’m sure at the very least it will be interesting to observe and to hear
> your explanations from at least 4 sections of emails I’ve just been reading
> - and hey - I will certainly be curious to see if the courts declare that
> you can throw mud at someone without any substantive proof in a public
> forum… might be an interesting precedent if they do
>
> Andrew
>
> Get Outlook for iOS 
> --
> *From:* Noah 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 4, 2022 9:13:03 PM
> *To:* Andrew Alston 
> *Cc:* Boubakar Barry ; General Discussions of
> AFRINIC 
> *Subject:* Re: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: DEFAMATION AGAINST MR. LU HENG :-/
>
>
>
> On Tue, 4 Jan 2022, 20:39 Andrew Alston, 
> wrote:
>
> No - I’m suggesting people don’t defame others and break the law by making
> statements that fall into the category of libel or defamation -
>
>
> You have to prove the defamation claims before a competent court if you
> were not aware.
>
> and if they choose to do so - then they accept the consequences.
>
>
> What consequences. Has there been a ruling in any competent court that
> someone was actually defamed?
>
> Your escalated and exaggerated statements are misleading.
>
>
> Calling someone a criminal in a public forum without any charges having
> been filed or proven - is defamatory.  It’s pretty simple really - just -
> don’t do it
>
>
> Dont attempt to spread lies Andrew.
>
> Who called who a criminal?
>
> Can you prove your false statement above by providing evidence of the same?
>
> Noah
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Message of Condolences to the family and friends of Mr. Serge Kabwika Ilunga

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Ooooh Serge, mon cher frère, mon ami, mon compagnon de lutte, tu t'en es
allé, en silence. Que l'Eternel t'accueille dans la félicité éternelle. Que
ton âme repose dans l'éternelle paix. Que la terre te soit légère. Amen.

Arnaud.



Le jeu. 23 déc. 2021 à 12:25, Eddy Kayihura  a écrit :

> Dear Colleagues,
>
> It is with profound sadness that we have learnt about the untimely death
> of our Board Member, Mr Serge Kabwika Ilunga.
>
> Mr Serge Kabwika Ilunga has served as a member of the AFRINIC Board since
> July 2017. While on the Board, Mr. Ilunga served on different committees
> including the Audit and the Remuneration Committees.
>
> Mr. Ilunga was the CEO of CSTelecomex. He has been actively involved in
> the development of the ICT sector in D.R. Congo where he served for many
> years numerous organisations including Vodacom Congo in several positions,
> BSDCongo, a non profit association that works to spread ICT in D.R Congo
> and promote freeware, among others.
>
> He was also a Member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
> Engineers (IEEE), Internet Society and was actively involved in several
> capacity building programs in D.R. Congo, contributing  to the Organisation
> of the first National Internet Governance Forum in D.R.Congo, the
> organisation of the Central Africa Internet Governance Forum, the
> deployment of KINIX (Kinshasa Exchange Point), among others.
>
> We wish to extend our deepest and most heartfelt condolences to the
> bereaved family, friends and to the Global Internet community.
>
> May his soul rest in eternal peace.
> Eddy Kayihura,
> Chief Executive Officer,
> African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC)
> c...@afrinic.net
>
> ……..
>
> Chers collègues,
>
> C'est avec une profonde tristesse que nous avons appris le décès prématuré
> de notre membre du conseil d'administration, Monsieur Serge Kabwika Ilunga.
> M. Serge Kabwika Ilunga était membre du conseil d'administration d'Afrinic
> depuis juillet 2017. M. Ilunga a siégé dans différents comités, notamment
> les comités d'audit et de rémunération.
>
> M. Ilunga était le directeur général de CSTelecomex. Il a été activement
> impliqué dans le développement du secteur des TIC en R.D. Congo où il a
> servi pendant de nombreuses années de nombreuses organisations dont Vodacom
> Congo à plusieurs postes, BSDCongo, une association à but non lucratif qui
> œuvre pour la diffusion des TIC au Congo et la promotion des logiciels
> libres, entre autres.
>
> Il était également membre de l'Institute of Electrical and Electronics
> Engineers (IEEE), de l'Internet Society et a participé activement à
> plusieurs programmes de renforcement des capacités en R.D. Congo,
> contribuant à l'organisation du premier Forum national sur la gouvernance
> de l'Internet en R.D. Congo, à l'organisation du Forum sur la gouvernance
> de l'Internet en Afrique centrale, au déploiement de KINIX (Kinshasa
> Exchange Point), entre autres.
>
> Nous souhaitons présenter nos plus sincères et profondes condoléances à la
> famille et aux amis endeuillés ainsi qu'à la communauté Internet mondiale.
> Que son âme repose dans la paix éternelle.
>
> Eddy Kayihura,
> Chief Executive Officer,
> African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC)
> c...@afrinic.net
>
> ….
>
> زملائي الاعزاء،
> لقد علمنا بحزن عميق بوفاة عضو مجلس الإدارة السيد سيرج كابويكا إيلونجا في
> وقت مبكر.
> عمل السيد Serge Kabwika Ilunga كعضو في مجلس إدارة AFRINIC منذ يوليو
> 2017.أثناء عضويته في مجلس الإدارة ، عمل السيد إلونجا في لجان مختلفة بما في
> ذلك لجان التدقيق والمكافآت.
> السيد Ilunga كان الرئيس التنفيذي لشركة CSTelecomex. شارك بنشاط في تطوير
> قطاع تكنولوجيا المعلومات والاتصالات في D.R. الكونغو حيث خدم لسنوات عديدة في
> العديد من المنظمات بما في ذلك Vodacom Congo في عدة مناصب ، BSDCongo ، وهي
> جمعية غير ربحية تعمل على نشر تكنولوجيا المعلومات والاتصالات في جمهورية
> الكونغو الديمقراطية والترويج للبرامج المجانية ، من بين أمور أخرى.
> كان أيضًا عضوًا في معهد مهندسي الكهرباء والإلكترونيات (IEEE) ، وجمعية
> الإنترنت وشارك بنشاط في العديد من برامج بناء القدرات في D.R. ساهم الكونغو
> في تنظيم المنتدى الوطني الأول لإدارة الإنترنت في جمهورية الكونغو
> الديمقراطية ، وتنظيم منتدى حوكمة الإنترنت في وسط إفريقيا ، ونشر KINIX
> (Kinshasa Exchange Point) ، من بين أمور أخرى.
> نود أن نتقدم بأعمق وأخلص تعازينا للأسرة المكلومة والأصدقاء ومجتمع الإنترنت
> العالمي.
> قد تبقى روحه في فسيح جناته.
> إيدي كاييهورا ،
> الرئيس التنفيذى،
> المركز الأفريقي لمعلومات الشبكة (AFRINIC)
> c...@afrinic.net
>
>
> …
>
> Caros colegas,
>
> É com profunda tristeza que tomámos conhecimento da morte prematura do
> nosso membro da direcção, Serge Kabwika Ilunga.
>
> Serge Kabwika Ilunga é membro do Conselho de Administração da AFRINIC
> desde Julho de 2017. O Sr. Ilunga serviu em diferentes comissões, incluindo
> as Comissões de Auditoria e de Remuneração.
>
> O Sr. Ilunga era o CEO da CSTelecomex. Tem estado activamente envolvido no
> desenvolvimento do sector 

Re: [Community-Discuss] The NRS at it again with endless lobbying

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Ronald, you get a big point here.

Regards

--
Arnaud


Le dim. 12 déc. 2021 à 08:33, Ronald F. Guilmette  a
écrit :

> Andrew Alston,  wrote:
>
> My question is - what business is it of yours what their motives
> are.
> Any company or any institution is free to offer promotional
> services as
> they see fit.
>
> Just a simple observation from the peanut gallery:
>
> If Lu Heng is now GIVING AWAY IP address blocks them maybe it would not be
> inappropriate
> to believe that maybe he didn't actually -need- quite as much as he
> originally was
> granted.
>
>
> Regards,
> rfg
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] The NRS at it again with endless lobbying

[Arnaud AMELINA]

@Ronald F. Guilmette  +1000...

Le dim. 12 déc. 2021 à 08:50, Ronald F. Guilmette  a
écrit :

> In message <
> am7pr03mb645102e30274dee846c07048ee...@am7pr03mb6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com
> >
> Andrew Alston  wrote:
>
> >Secondly - you keep referring to my time on the board - so - I once again
> >ask AfriNIC to please release me from the NDA to which I am bound so that
> I
> >am free to share what really happened during this period.
>
> This is kind-of a bullshit response for two (2) reasons:
>
> 1)  You *know* that AFRINIC is never going to say to you "OK, because you
> are
> such a sweet guy, we have decided that our NDAs are no longer applicable in
> your case."  It's just never gonna happen, so your statement is silly and
> vacuous on the face of it.  It is maningless.  You killed a bunch of
> electrons
> for absolutely nothing.
>
> 2)  AFRINIC is not in a position to sue anybody, EVEN IF someone were to
> *publicly*
> break one of their old NDAs.  So if you had any balls and if you had
> anything of
> importance to say, you would have said it already, if not publicly, and on
> the
> record, then you could have leaked what you know, confidentially, to any
> number
> of journalists.  (I have some phone numbers in case you are totally unable
> to find
> them on your own.)
>
> I'm sorry Andrew, but I have no patience for these games.  As you may
> know, we have
> a committee of our congress *and* a few thousand journalists who are
> working their
> butts off, as we speak, to try to find out the real truth of what happened
> in
> Washington D.C. this past January 6th.  The Trump loyalists are all hiding
> behind
> false claims of "executive privilege", just as you are hding behind your
> NDA, but
> other people *are* talking, both on and off the record, and as a result,
> the whole
> truth about January 6th *is* going to come out.
>
> You can either be part of the solution or be part of the problem.  Which
> you choose
> to be has more to do with your character than it has to do with any piece
> of paper,
> and it is a matter of public record that you have been on the "RIRs can
> blow me if
> they don't like wnat I'm doing" team for many many years now.  That puts
> you
> unambiguously on the same team as Lu Heng, and I guess that's why you
> don't really
> care to tell anybody what you know about how he really came to have more
> than $100
> million USD worth of "mana from heaven".
>
>
> Regards,
> rfg
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Update on legal case - Freeze of Bank accounts

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Félicitation à toute l'équipe d'AFRINIC, un grand clin d'œil à l'équipe
juridique.
Mais le Résultat ne nous surprend pas du tout, car savions dès le départ
qu'EFRINIC s'en sortirait, et l'Histoire et le Temps nous donnent raison.

C'est une Grande Victoire pour la Communauté d'AFRINIC.

./

Le ven. 15 oct. 2021 à 13:01, Eddy Kayihura  a écrit :

> Dear Colleagues,
>
> Please see the message below that was shared with our members.
> --
>
> Kind Regards
>
> Eddy Kayihura M.
> Chief Executive Officer
> African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC) Ltd.
> 
> t: +230 403 51 00  |  tt: @afrinic  |  https://www.afrinic.net  |
> youtube.com/afrinicmedia
> ___
>
> Vision: “A secure and accessible Internet for sustainable digital growth
> in Africa”
> Mission: “To serve the African Internet community by delivering efficient
> services in a global multi-stakeholder environment”
> Values: EPIC (■ Excellence ■ Passion ■ Integrity ■ Community Driven)
>
>
>
> ***
> This email and any attachment (s) transmitted with it are
> confidential. They may also be privileged or otherwise protected by law.
> They are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to
> whom they are addressed. If you have received this email by error
> please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete this e-mail
> from your system. You are also notified that disclosing,
> copying, distributing, or taking any action in relation to its contents is
> strictly prohibited and unlawful. By reading the message and opening any
> attachment, the recipient accepts full responsibility for taking protective
> and remedial action about viruses and other defects.
>
>
> ***
>
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *Eddy Kayihura 
> *Subject: **[members-discuss] Update on legal case - Freeze of Bank
> accounts*
> *Date: *15 October 2021 at 14:53:03 GMT+4
> *To: *AfriNIC Discuss 
>
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> We are happy to inform our stakeholders that there was a court hearing
> today with regard to our application for removal of the freezing order
> against AFRINIC.
>
>
> The Court, after considering our application and the case initiated by
> Cloud Innovation Ltd, has declared the order null and void. In short,
> AFRINIC has won this case against Cloud Innovation Ltd.
>
>
> There is another Appeal to be heard on 11th November 2021. We will keep
> you informed of the outcome and we are quietly optimistic that justice will
> prevail.
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Eddy Kayihura
> Chief Executive Officer
> African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC)
> c...@afrinic.net
>
> …...
>
> Chers Collègues,
>
> Nous sommes heureux de vous informer qu'une audience a eu lieu aujourd'hui
> au tribunal concernant notre demande de levée de l'ordonnance de gel des
> comptes d'AFRINIC.
>
>
> Le tribunal, après avoir examiné notre demande et l'affaire initiée par
> Cloud Innovation Ltd, a déclaré l'ordonnance nulle et non avenue. En bref,
> AFRINIC a gagné ce procès contre Cloud Innovation Ltd.
>
>
> Un autre appel doit être entendu le 11 novembre 2021. Nous vous tiendrons
> informés du dénouement et nous sommes optimistes quant à la justice.
>
> Cordialement,
>
> Eddy Kayihura
> Directeur général
> Le Centre d'information du réseau africain
> c...@afrinic.net
> ……...
>
> زملائي الاعزاء،
>
> يسعدنا إبلاغ أصحاب المصلحة لدينا أنه كانت هناك جلسة استماع اليوم فيما
> يتعلق بطلبنا لإزالة أمر التجميد ضد AFRINIC.
>
>
> أعلنت المحكمة ، بعد النظر في طلبنا والقضية التي رفعتها شركة Cloud
> Innovation Ltd ، أن الأمر باطل ولاغٍ. باختصار ، فازت AFRINIC بقضيتها ضد
> Cloud Innovation Ltd.
>
>
> هناك نداء آخر سيتم الاستماع إليه في 11 نوفمبر. سنبقيك على اطلاع بالنتيجة
> ونحن متفائلون بهدوء بأن العدالة ستسود.
>
> AFRINIC للاتصالات
>
> .
>
> Caros colegas,
>
> Temos o prazer de informar as nossas partes interessadas de que houve hoje
> uma audiência judicial relativamente ao nosso pedido de retirada da ordem
> de congelamento contra a AFRINIC.
>
>
> O Tribunal, após considerar o nosso pedido e o processo iniciado pela
> Cloud Innovation Ltd, declarou a ordem nula e sem efeito. Em suma, a
> AFRINIC ganhou o seu processo contra a Cloud Innovation Ltd.
>
>
> Há outro recurso a ser ouvido a 11 de Novembro de 2021. Manter-vos-emos
> informados sobre o resultado e estamos tranquilamente optimistas de que a
> justiça prevalecerá.
>
> Cumprimentos,
>
> Eddy Kayihura
> Chefe do Executivo
> O Centro de Informação da Rede Africana
> c...@afrinic.net
>
>
> Vision: “A secure and accessible Internet for sustainable digital growth
> in Africa”
> Mission: “To serve the African Internet community by delivering efficient
> services in a global multi-stakeholder environment”
> Values: EPIC (■ Excellence ■ Passion ■ 

Re: [Community-Discuss] Associated Press article

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi Ronald,
Recent discussions(*) enlighten  somehow  the contexts in which Cloud
Innovation allocations were made.
Let not narrow down  things and not create unnecessary tension.

Unless evidence exists to prove collisions or conflict of interest, I see
nothing wrong with CEO having meeting with people.
Lu probably met all AFRINICs CEOs, but also met other people including even
those who disagree with him as well as with Cloud Innovation and Larus
activities

While 1st allocation is important, subsequent allocations require
justifications, but also proof of usage (80-90 %) of previous allocations
according to justifications and in compliance with policies and RSA..

The process initiated by AFRINIC and the ongoing cases will also show
deficiencies and complicities if they do exist…

--
Arnaud

(*)

https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2021-August/004628.html

https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2021-August/004692.html

Le ven. 1 oct. 2021 à 21:24, Ronald F. Guilmette  a
écrit :

> https://twitter.com/fbajak/status/1443927102793920515?s=21
>
> As you can see, the Associated Press has just published something relating
> to the ongoing saga of AFRINIC, its trials and tribulations.
>
> I have a few brief comments on this.
>
> Firstly, I find it really rather interesting that Adiel Akplogan met
> (privately?) with Lu Hung, apparently at the ICANN meeting in Beijing,
> 7-11 April, 2013, just shortly before Lu Heng received his first big
> allocation of IP space.
>
> This, combined with the fact that the then current AFRINIC CEO, Adiel
> Akplogan, was at the time operating his own private company in Canada,
> whose actual business endeavors have never been very well explained,
> is, at the very least, suggestive that more questions should be asked
> about Lu Heng's original justification(s) for the large amount of IPv4
> space he got.
>
> I have asked here to see those original Cloud Innovation justification
> documents and that request has been met only with stony silence in reply.
>
> One thing is clear however, from both AP's reporting and from my own
> research -- Lu Heng has repeatedly claimed that he was awarded his
> various large IPv4 block initially based on his purported need to
> support vast numbers of VPN end users in China.  From the AP article:
>
> Emails obtained by the AP show that in his initial request for IP
> addresses in 2013, Lu made clear to AFRINIC that his customers would
> be in China. In those emails, Lu said he needed the addresses for
> virtual private networks -- known as VPNs -- to circumvent the Chinese
> government's firewall that blocks popular websites like Facebook and
> YouTube there.
>
> He said he discussed this with Adiel Akplogan, AFRINIC's first CEO,
> in Beijing in a 2013 meeting cited in the emails.
>
> These facts are absolutely astonishing and I urge everyone to take special
> note of them.  The five Regional Internet Registries are generally assumed
> to be mostly or entirely apolitical bodies, but here we have a documented
> case in which one of the five, AFRINIC, is alleged to have deliberately
> and with clear intent facilitated the large scale circumvention of one
> country's local Internet regulations.  And not just any country, but
> China, the newest superpower in what is now our tri-polar world.
>
> If I were some high official of the Chinese Communist Party, I would at
> this moment be dashing off an angry and pointed diplomatic communiqué
> demanding an explanation, and an apology, from AFRINIC leadership.  It
> is one thing to be "just a bookkeeper", as Lu Hung insists the RIRs
> should be, and quite another to be an active and knowing participant in
> a deliberate scheme to undermine and circumvent some country's national
> Internet regulation efforts.  The fact that this was done, allegedly, for
> the good cause of anti-censorship does not change the fact that AFRINIC
> apparently involved itself in a bit of surreptitious and clandestine
> international intrigue whose clear and stated goal was to engineer a
> large scale end-run around China's Great Firewall.
>
> As an American, I am rabidly supportive of the free flow of information,
> including into and out of China.  But I am not persuaded that AFRINIC, as
> an international Internet administrative body, should ever have involved
> itself in such a politically fraught back-room scheme.  The fact that it
> appears to have done so is not likely to enhance its image on the world
> stage, nor that of any of the other RIRs, whose international reputations
> may also be damaged by these revelations.
>
> That having been said, I do suspect that Chinese Communist Party was not
> and is not totally unaware of what Lu Heng has been up to from 2013
> onwards.
> Why haven't they arrested him for his gross attempts to circumvent the
> Party's singular control of the Chinese Internet?  I could speculate, but
> I prefer to just leave the question 

Re: [Community-Discuss] Ancient History

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Fren h version

Hu! Chers membres de la communauté,

C'est très intéressant de constater que Notre cher Owen champion en
démonstration par la rhétorique, afin de prouver que sa compréhension des
choses est la meilleure et que toute autre interprétation relève
d'incompétence et où d'ignorance, serait devenu très silencieux, voir
fuyant devant une simple question nécessitant une simple réponse booléenne
(oui ou non) posée par John.

Maintenant il devient bègue, devant, là aussi de simples questions
nécessitant tout aussi de simples réponses booléennes, questions posées par
Ronald.

Notre cher, Monsieur je sais tout, brusquement, ne sais pas si Ou bien
il ne veut pas de prononcer sur une affaire pendante en justice, donc
il devient sélectif en fonction de qui lui pose les questions, si c'est une
personne qui le connaît tres bien, il feinte et refuse de répéter une
réponse qu'il aurait donné... Bla Bla Bla

On sait maintenant qui est qui et qui peut quoi. Un adage de chez nis
voisin de Côte d'Ivoire dit : "tu as Rencontré Garçon..."

Que ceux qui doutent maintenant se fassent une raison de comprendre mieux
la situation qui se présente et qu'ils se fassent leur idée sur qui
supporter.

English version :

H!  Dear community members,


 It is very interesting to note that Our dear Owen champion in
demonstration by rhetoric, in order to prove that his understanding of
things is the best and that any other interpretation is incompetent and
where ignorance, would have become very silent, see  fleeing from a simple
question requiring a simple Boolean answer (yes or no) posed by John.


 Now he becomes stutterer, in front of, again simple questions requiring
just as simple Boolean answers, questions asked by Ronald.


 Our dear, Mister, I know everything, suddenly, do not know if ... Or he
does not want to pronounce on a pending case ..., so he becomes selective
depending on who asks him the questions,  if it is a person who knows him
very well, he pretends and refuses to repeat an answer he would have given
... Bla Bla Bla 


 We now know who is who and who can do what.  An adage from our neighbor in
Ivory Coast says: "to day you met a boy ..."


 Let those who are now in doubt find a reason to better understand the
situation at hand and make up their minds on who to support.



--
Arnaud

Le mar. 24 août 2021 à 16:14, Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss@afrinic.net> a écrit :

> >
> > I should begin by stating my assumptions, some or all of which may be
> wrong,
> > and asking Owen if he can either confirm or refute any of these,
> specifically:
> >
> >a)  that the Lu Heng who is the current primary stockholder of Cloud
> >Innocation, Ltd.  (Seychelles) which is currently involved in
> >litigation against AFRINIC is the same Lu Heng who previously was
> >the registrant of certain IPv4 address blocks within the RIPE
> region,
> >and...
> >
> >b)  that this same Lu Heng is or was also the prmary stockholder of
> >another company referred to in RIPE records as ORG-HLTA1-RIPE
> >aka "Wu Han YunWaiHeng information Technology, Co,Ltd." (CN)
> >
> > Owen, would you disagree with either of the above two
> assumptions/assertions
> > on my part?
>
> Regarding a, I can only state that it is my understanding from Lu that he
> once held space in RIPE. Beyond that, I lack sufficient knowledge to either
> confirm or deny your assertion.
>
> I have no knowledge base on which I could confirm or deny anything about b,
> so I don’t know how to answer your question there as I lack the necessary
> knowledge to agree or disagree with your assertion.
>
> > Assuming that the answer is "no" on both counts, then I have just a
> couple
> > of additional questions for Owen relating to the following simple
> timeline
> > that I put together which, I believe, shows events relating to the
> various
> > RIPE-region IPv4 allocations that are or were associated with the
> organisation
> > handle ORG-HLTA1-RIPE:
>
> Since I can neither answer yes or no completely to either of your
> questions,
> this assertion fails and I therefore presume that the remaining questions
> are not relevant.
>
> Owen
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] ARIN without Owen Delong ?

[Arnaud AMELINA]

NANGHAKA ; Marcus K. G. Adomey <
> mado...@hotmail.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] ARIN without Owen Delong ?
>
> Daniel,
>
> Responding in private since this is off-topic for the list.
>
> This really has nothing to do with the AFRNIC PDP and has to do with
> things I want to be able to say and advocate for in the ARIN region.
>
> There is no conflict between my activities in AFRINIC PDP and my role on
> the ARIN AC.
>
> As to my interest in the AFRINIC PDP, you should note that I’m also at
> various times active in APNIC, LACNIC, RIPE, and ARIN PDPs.
>
> I make my living as a consultant and I have at various times had clients
> all over the world and some clients with global networks. As a result, I am
> often asked to pay attention to the PDP in those regions.
>
> I am also someone with a strong sense of community service. As such, since
> I am obliged to monitor the process for my client(s) anyway, I will often
> work towards what I perceive as the best interests of the community
> (regardless of whether it is best for my client or not) and I will often
> advocate as such. In general, I select clients who are generally
> ideologically aligned with me.
>
> One exception is Cloud Innovation. While I am not ideologically 100% in
> agreement with them and do not necessarily favor the current state of
> policy which benefits them, I am even more concerned that the RIRs cannot
> simply make up policy or randomly interpret policy to suit their
> ideological goals and must, instead, follow the policy as written until it
> is amended through the proper community process.
>
> AFRINIC has a long history of corruption, election irregularities,
> financial misdeeds, and failure to properly follow its own rules in both
> its governance process and in its management of the IP registry database.
> As such, I have maintained a high level of interest in AFRINIC’s doings in
> an effort to do what I can to help resolve those issues.
>
> Owen
>
> On Jul 14, 2021, at 03:38 , DANIEL NANGHAKA  wrote:
>
> Dear Marcus,
>
> I strongly agree, that there are policy updates from the other RIRs, what
> is catching my interest at the moment is that Owen has been one of the very
> active participants on PDP and I believe AFRINIC has a high level of
> freedom of expression.
> When he gives a reason that he wants to have greater freedom and
> flexibility to advocate for changes in the internet community, some of
> which would be considered a conflict of interest with his role as an
> Advisory Council member. I begin to realise that Owen could have been
> having a high conflict of interest which conflicted with his position on
> the AC.
>
> Dear Owen,
> Owen, kindly advise how we could deal with the Conflict of Interest in the
> PDP as you state it clearly in your reason. Furthermore, I still have
> question marks as to why the AFRINIC PDP is of high interest to you - yet
> the Policies discussed are for the development of the Internet in Africa.
> Is something wrong with the AFRINIC PDP that stimulates high interest for
> your participation in AFRINIC Process that the Africa participants have
> failed to solve which requires your expertise?
>
> Is ARIN more superior than AFRINIC?
>
> Thanks
> Daniel
>
>
> ᐧ
>
> On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 at 13:26, Marcus K. G. Adomey 
> wrote:
>
> Dear Owen and PDWG,
>
> I don’t think this is an off-topic. There are reasons why we always have
> session on “policy update from other RIRs” at every PPM…it’s like we care
> for what happened at ARIN  PDP through its AC and  possible impact on our
> PDP and related issues
>
> In response  to the statement below, one would like to know why  is Owen
> talking  about “  was not forced to resign”?  Nobody said so AFAIK, how
> come the position at ARIN constitute restraint to speech and why only now?
>
> And question for this community is how  do we deal with conflict of
> interest in our PDP?
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Marcus
>
>
> --
> *From:* Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 13, 2021 5:03:19 PM
> *To:* Arnaud AMELINA 
> *Cc:* General Discussions of AFRINIC ;
> AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion List 
> *Subject:* Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] ARIN without Owen Delong ?
>
> Apologies to the list for this off-topic posting, but given the
> unwarranted attention already paid to the
> matter and the escalating level of speculation, I beg your indulgence.
> This will (hopefully) be the
> only post I make on the matter here.
>
> For clarity:
>
> 1. I chose to resign my position on the ARIN AC. I was not forced to
> resign. I did not have to resign.
> So your s

Re: [Community-Discuss] Share About Cloud Innovation Ltd and their business

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi Ronald

Le mar. 3 août 2021 à 23:59, Arnaud AMELINA  a écrit :

>
>
> ...
>
>
>
>> Th names of board members or board chairmen on these dates is perfectly
>> irrelevant because the board never reviewed any of these allocations,
>> or any of the documents or other materials that were used to justify them.
>> The allocations were all made as a result of "staff" decisions, not the
>> board.
>>
>
> You can't be totally sure on this one, because it was the period we saw
> the Board playing the CEO Prerogatives, and entering in the micromanagement
> of AFRINIC, remember.
>

As I said here, you can't be totally sure, find below some useful
informations

Allocations to CI have  been controversial since the beginning and have
been discussed intensively on list since 2014.

Board got involved at some point as one can see from the minutes of board
meetings held  in November 2014(*)

It reads:


2.0 Discussion and decision about the Board Statement regarding the case of
a particular resource application.

There was a discussion about whether the Board should make a statement. SF
said that a message had been sent on the RPD list.

The CEO pointed out that the Registration Services Team has encountered
several difficulties with the application.

AA argued that a statement made by a third party on the list meant there
was a dispute.

The Legal Counsel explained the term ‘dispute’ and suggested that there is
no dispute yet.

The CEO said that right now there is no dispute. And that he has already
given the confirmation for the staff to allocate the resources. The CEO
reminded the Board of the need to stay within the policies.

The Legal Counsel informed the Board that AFRINIC can’t withhold a genuine
request for IP allocations, it has to allocate, and if later it gets
evidence that the application was fraudulent, supported by evidence
collected, then it will be able to recover the resources as per the RSA.

The Board unanimously adopted the following resolution.
Resolution 201411.214 The Board resolves that; The authority is hereby
delegated to the CEO to use any available methods, at his discretion, to
authenticate resource allocation applications.

Few questionings to help the thinking:

1- Why was there a need for the Board at that time to get involved in a
routinely operational matter of a resource allocation?

2. Why was there a need for the Board to pass a resolution for something
suspicious that was already within the CEO’s authority?

3- Did we postpone the disputes to now ?

(*)https://www.afrinic.net/ast/pdf/2014-minutes/20141123-minutes.pdf


>
>
>
>>
>> In my opinion, -all- of these allocations are suspect, and they are made
>> moreso because neither Lu Heng nor his apparent primary spokesman here,
>> Owen DeLong, has seen fit to share with any of us any of the materials or
>> documentation that was used to provide the required justifications for
>> any of these allocations -originally- even though it is 100% clear that
>> all such records, dating back nearly five years ago to over eight years
>> ago, are no longer in any sense relevant to Cloud Innovation's -current-
>> business model or business operations.
>>
>> The time for dark secrets is over.  Lu Heng has elected to try his case
>> on the mailing lists and in the press.  OK.  Fine.  Then let's do that.
>>
>> The question of whether or not Lu Heng's -current- usage of his IP space
>> does or does not meet acceptable criteria is irrelevant if his -original-
>> justifications for the space were in any way inadequate or less than
>> truthful.  So let's see those original justifications and let the people
>> decide whether or not Lu Heng even deserved to be granted this much IPv4
>> space in the first place.
>>
>> Only Lu Heng can give us those original justification documents, if he so
>> chooses.  AFRINIC is still bound by confidentiality rules and thus cannot
>> legally provide them to any party outside of AFRINIC.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> rfg
>>
>> ___
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Share About Cloud Innovation Ltd and their business

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Owen,

I proved with public data that your claim that all Cloud Innovation Limited
IPv4 resources had been allocated with Adiel as CEO,  is FALSE and
misleading.  The 2x /11 were allocated by other CEO after Adiel had left.

Your follow on question is then irrelevant .

Forcing  people to respond to your question?  I noted if not mistaken, that
you have NOT responded until now to the question about the Conflict of
Interest.

--
Arnaud

Le mer. 4 août 2021 à 01:14, Owen DeLong  a écrit :

>
>
> On Aug 3, 2021, at 14:52 , Arnaud AMELINA  wrote:
>
>
>
> Le jeu. 29 juil. 2021 à 02:44, Owen DeLong  a écrit :
>
>>
>>
>> On Jul 28, 2021, at 16:57 , Arnaud AMELINA  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Oui en effet on se rappelle bien de cette période où le Board entrait
>> dans le Mico-management d'Afrinic, et jouait quasiment le Rôle du CEO, sans
>> que ce dernier ne réclame son droit, car ce sont eux qui l'ont recruté face
>> à un Candidat hors du commun, respect de la communauté Internet mondiale.
>> Il avait donc peut-être peur pour son poste.
>>
>>
>> The CEO at the time that our addresses were issued was none other than
>> Adiel Akplogan, so it’s not really clear to me who you think you are
>> targeting here, as I thought he was in place since the beginning of
>> AFRINIC. What early better candidate do you believe was passed up in hiring
>> Adiel?
>>
>
> Why are you in a hurry to mention *Adiel* for? Are you desperate again?
>
>
> A hurry? You are the one who brought up the CEO. I merely pointed out
> which CEO you were accusing. Why do you have a problem with this? I’ll note
> that you still have not answered my actual question.
>
> As I said before, history knows who were in the place when all resources
> were provided to CI. After some research, we can summarize as follows:
>
> Adiel was not the ceo who allocated all the numbers and we can see how
> the  allocations went 1st /12  2nd /12 and then the 1st /11 and 2nd /11 and
> all this happened within a 12 months time frame!
>
>
> Yes… And each with a valid justification and utilization data for previous
> resources duly and properly submitted.
>
> Thus, CI looted the numbers within a year after first CEO, Adiel Akplogan
> left Afrinic. *The cat was away and the mice played?*
>
>
> I take issue with your use of the term looted which implies a crime of
> theft during a war, riot, or other civil unrest. I do not believe such a
> civil unrest existed in AFRINIC at the time, nor do I believe that the
> resource registrations were obtained by theft.
>
> Here are the CI allocations mixed with officers at time of allocations for
> everyone to see and know truth
>
>
> Corrections inline:
>
> *2004 ceo Adiel Akplogan *
>
> *2013 July 24 1st /12  *
> *2013 July chair Viv Padayatchy *
> *2014 September Adiel Akplogan resigned *
> *2014 September chair Sunday Folayan*
> *2014 December 01 2nd /12 *
> *2014 December 31 acting ceo Patrisse (Invalid because he is a resident of
> Mauritius and thus prohibited by bylaws from being CEO)*
> *2014 December chair Sunday Folayan *
> *2015 December 22 1st /11 *
> *2015 December ceo Alan Barrett *
> *2015 December chair Sunday Folayan*
> *2016 September 23 2nd /11*
> *2016 ceo Alan Barrett *
> *2016 chair Sunday Folayan*
>
>
> So we have, according to you, a single /12 issued under Adiel, a /12 and a
> /11 issued under Patrisse, and a /11 issued under Alan Barrett.
>
> I’m trying to get exact issue dates to confirm whether your chronology
> works or not, but even if it does, are you claiming that Patrisse and/or
> Alan were, in some way, corrupt or suborned improper allocations by the
> registry? That’s a pretty serious accusation and I’d say you should have
> some pretty strong evidence to back it up. Further, you still haven’t
> answered the question as to which candidate you feel was passed up for CEO
> who would somehow have not issued these allocations or why.
>
>
> Some Board Directors 2014 - 2017
> *2013 - 2018 Sunday Folayan*
> *2014 - 2017 Andrew Alston*
> *2009 - 2015 Mark Elkins*
> *2014 - 2017 Kris Seeburn*
> *2013 - 2018 Haitham El Nakhal*
>
> The full details are on Afrinic web site
>
>
> You are mistaking “changed:” date (last update) for “issued:” date (not
> published).
>
> Owen
>
>
> —-
> *inetnum:   154.80.0.0  154.95.255.255   /12 *
>
> netname:Cloud-Innovation-v4-I
>
> descr:  Cloud Innovation Ltd
>
> changed:hostmas...@afrinic.net *20130724*
>
>
> *inetnum: 45.192.0.0 - 45.207.255.255   /12 *
>
> netname:Cloud-Innovation-v4-I
>
> de

Re: [Community-Discuss] Share About Cloud Innovation Ltd and their business

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Le mar. 3 août 2021 à 23:09, Ronald F. Guilmette  a
écrit :

> In message <
> cagdmr_cl96mmufnsdq8k2pssdrsyw1jiz_k2nshisybe7s5...@mail.gmail.com>
> Arnaud AMELINA  wrote:
>
> >As I said before, history knows who were in the place when all resources
> >were provided to CI. After some research, we can summarize as follows:
> >
> >Adiel was not the ceo who allocated all the numbers and we can see how the
> >allocations went 1st /12  2nd /12 and then the 1st /11 and 2nd /11 and all
> >this happened within a 12 months time frame!
>
> I'm sorry, but your information is just not accurate.  The version history
> of each block provides the correct information about the original
> allocation dates, and it is as follows:
>
> 2013-07-24 -- 154.80.0.0/12
> 2014-12-01 -- 45.192.0.0/12
> 2015-12-22 -- 156.224.0.0/11
> 2016-09-23 -- 154.192.0.0/11
>
> Do you disagree with this timeline?  If so, on what basis?
>

No you're right on this one, thanks for the correction, apologize fort the
mistake.


> Th names of board members or board chairmen on these dates is perfectly
> irrelevant because the board never reviewed any of these allocations,
> or any of the documents or other materials that were used to justify them.
> The allocations were all made as a result of "staff" decisions, not the
> board.
>

You can't be totally sure on this one, because it was the period we saw the
Board playing the CEO Prerogatives, and entering in the micromanagement of
AFRINIC, remember.


> The first two of these allocations were granted under CEO Akplogan, who
> did not leave his CEO position until January 31, 2015:
>
> https://afrinic.net/20140917-ceo-adiel-akplogan-resign



I'm OK with this one too, but he already resigned before the allocation,
isn't it?


>
> The two later allocations were granted under CEO Barrett.
>

If do so, how come New CEO gave 2 of /11 in such a short time?

>
> ALL of the allocations were made during a time period when Ernest
> Byaruhanga
> was a high-ranking officer of AFRINIC.
>


You're right on this one too.


>
>
> In my opinion, -all- of these allocations are suspect, and they are made
> moreso because neither Lu Heng nor his apparent primary spokesman here,
> Owen DeLong, has seen fit to share with any of us any of the materials or
> documentation that was used to provide the required justifications for
> any of these allocations -originally- even though it is 100% clear that
> all such records, dating back nearly five years ago to over eight years
> ago, are no longer in any sense relevant to Cloud Innovation's -current-
> business model or business operations.
>
> The time for dark secrets is over.  Lu Heng has elected to try his case
> on the mailing lists and in the press.  OK.  Fine.  Then let's do that.
>
> The question of whether or not Lu Heng's -current- usage of his IP space
> does or does not meet acceptable criteria is irrelevant if his -original-
> justifications for the space were in any way inadequate or less than
> truthful.  So let's see those original justifications and let the people
> decide whether or not Lu Heng even deserved to be granted this much IPv4
> space in the first place.
>
> Only Lu Heng can give us those original justification documents, if he so
> chooses.  AFRINIC is still bound by confidentiality rules and thus cannot
> legally provide them to any party outside of AFRINIC.
>
>
> Regards,
> rfg
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Share About Cloud Innovation Ltd and their business

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Le jeu. 29 juil. 2021 à 02:44, Owen DeLong  a écrit :

>
>
> On Jul 28, 2021, at 16:57 , Arnaud AMELINA  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
> Oui en effet on se rappelle bien de cette période où le Board entrait dans
> le Mico-management d'Afrinic, et jouait quasiment le Rôle du CEO, sans que
> ce dernier ne réclame son droit, car ce sont eux qui l'ont recruté face à
> un Candidat hors du commun, respect de la communauté Internet mondiale. Il
> avait donc peut-être peur pour son poste.
>
>
> The CEO at the time that our addresses were issued was none other than
> Adiel Akplogan, so it’s not really clear to me who you think you are
> targeting here, as I thought he was in place since the beginning of
> AFRINIC. What early better candidate do you believe was passed up in hiring
> Adiel?
>

Why are you in a hurry to mention *Adiel* for? Are you desperate again?

As I said before, history knows who were in the place when all resources
were provided to CI. After some research, we can summarize as follows:

Adiel was not the ceo who allocated all the numbers and we can see how the
allocations went 1st /12  2nd /12 and then the 1st /11 and 2nd /11 and all
this happened within a 12 months time frame!

Thus, CI looted the numbers within a year after first CEO, Adiel Akplogan
left Afrinic. *The cat was away and the mice played?*

Here are the CI allocations mixed with officers at time of allocations for
everyone to see and know truth

*2013 July 24 1st /12  *
*2013 July ceo Adiel Akplogan *
*2013 July chair Viv Padayatchy *
*2014 September Adiel Akplogan resigned *
*2014 September chair Sunday Folayan*
*2014 December 01 2nd /12 *
*2014 December acting ceo Patrisse*
*2014 December chair Sunday Folayan *
*2015 December 22 1st /11 *
*2015 December ceo Alan Barrett *
*2015 December chair Sunday Folayan*
*2016 September 23 2nd /11*
*2016 ceo Alan Barrett *
*2016 chair Sunday Folayan*

Some Board Directors 2014 - 2017
*2013 - 2018 Sunday Folayan*
*2014 - 2017 Andrew Alston*
*2009 - 2015 Mark Elkins*
*2014 - 2017 Kris Seeburn*
*2013 - 2018 Haitham El Nakhal*

The full details are on Afrinic web site
—-
*inetnum:   154.80.0.0  154.95.255.255   /12 *

netname:Cloud-Innovation-v4-I

descr:  Cloud Innovation Ltd

changed:hostmas...@afrinic.net *20130724*


*inetnum: 45.192.0.0 - 45.207.255.255   /12 *

netname:Cloud-Innovation-v4-I

descr:  Cloud Innovation Ltd

changed:hostmas...@afrinic.net *20141201*


*inetnum:156.224.0.0 -156.255.255.255 /11 *

netname:CloudInnovation-infrastructure

descr:  Cloud Innovation Ltd

changed:hostmas...@afrinic.net *20151222*


  *inetnum:154.192.0.0 - 154.223.255.255 /11 *

netname:Cloud-Innovation-v4-II changed:
hostmas...@afrinic.net *20160923*


*board announced Adiel's depart September 2014, effective 31/01/2015 *

*https://afrinic.net/20140917-ceo-adiel-akplogan-resign
<https://afrinic.net/20140917-ceo-adiel-akplogan-resign>*

All this for the record and education.

Regards

--
Arnaud
...


>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Share About Cloud Innovation Ltd and their business

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Chers membres d la communauté
Ne voyez-vous pas que Owen se paie notre tête (expression francophone
j'ignore si ça existe en anglais). Il répète le même refrain tout le temps
comme Fernando l'a fait remarquer. Malgré toutes les preuves à lui fourni
par tous les autres contributeurs il répète les même choses, maintenant je
viens à douter que même lui n'est pas auteur de ses différents textes qu'il
postes, parce que sans aucune cohérence avec les autres contributions qui
lui ont répondu. Rien que de la répétition argumentaires comme si nous
n'avons que ça à faire. Eux , ils sont payer pour produire ces genres de
documents toute la journée, lui et ses echochambers. Je ne juge même plus
utile de le lui répondre , tellement il répète les mêmes erreurs de
compréhension. On dirait qu'il veut se convaincre que ce qu'il dit est
juste et véridique, car lui-même n'en est pas encore convaincu.

English

Dear community members

 Can't you see that Owen is "paying our head " (French expression I don't
know if it exists in English).  He repeats the same refrain all the time as
Fernando pointed out.  Despite all the evidence provided to him by all the
other contributors, he repeats the same things, now I doubt that even him,
is not the author of the various texts that he posts, because without any
consistency with the others contributions answering him.  Nothing but
repeating arguments as if we have only that to do.  They are paid to
produce these kinds of documents all day long, with his echochambers.  I no
longer even consider it useful to answer him, because he is repeating the
same errors of understanding.  It looks like he wants to convince himself
that what he is saying is right and true, because himself is not yet
convinced.

--
Arnaud

Le mar. 3 août 2021 à 04:00, Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss@afrinic.net> a écrit :

>
>
> On Aug 2, 2021, at 00:03 , Sylvain Baya  wrote:
>
> Dear AfriNIC's Community,
>
> Please see my comments below, inline...
>
> Le samedi 31 juillet 2021, Owen DeLong  a écrit :
>
>>
>>
>> On Jul 30, 2021, at 15:14 , Sylvain Baya  wrote:
>>
>> Dear AfriNIC's Community,
>>
>> Le mercredi 28 juillet 2021, Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <
>> community-discuss@afrinic.net> a écrit :
>>
>>>
>>>

> [...]



>>> You’re not answering the question I asked…
>>>
>>>
>> Hi Owen,
>> Thanks for your email, brother!
>>
>>
>>
>>> What is your basis in policy for claiming that a VM is OK, but leasing
>>> addresses without providing connectivity
>>> services is not?
>>>
>>>
>> ...you might have forgotten about a simple notion,
>> called: conservation. You shall recognize it as it has
>>  been refered out there as *Reservations*.
>>
>>
>> I have not forgotten, but we are not talking about reservation.
>>
>>
> Hi Owen,
> Thanks to take time to reply to my email, brother.
>
> ...so, *we*! i assume the same *we* you usually
> use to call your team to support your personal  interpretation of the
> facts?
>
>
> No, we is you and I, the people engaged in this particular conversational
> thread.
>
>
> Btw, you are entitled to your own opinion.
>
> ...let's, at least, agree to disagree :-/
>
>
>>
>> We are talking about deployment on an actual
>> host connected to the internet for legitimate use.
>>
>>
>
> ...again, *we*:=you+your_supporting_team, brother?
>
> For what it's worth, in order to lease community's
> ressources such as INRs, one shall *reserve* it first;
>
>
> Um, that’s true whether one is leasing the INRs with or
> without connnectivity services attached, so you have
> either pointed out how we are identical to every other
> LIR, or, you have both pointed this out _AND_ called
> into question the standard practice of every LIR.
>
> I’m not sure which is intended.
>
> otherwise, any of the end-users/clients shall come
> to the Registration Service to request the needed
> INRs; sure to find some there...and you know it:
>
>
> We don’t do anything to interfere with or prevent end-users
> or clients from seeking internet number resources from any
> other source.
>
> those must be incorporated within the AfriNIC's
> service region...they would save a lot of money
> comparing to what could be otherwise payed to
> an intermediary *LIR*...not *GIR*...
>
>
> Many LIRs operate on a global scale, including, for
> example, Verizon, Hurricane Electric, Akamai, and
> more. The term LIR is primarily used not so much to
> indicate some diminutive scope as to provide a convenient
> distinction from RIR (regional, quasi-continental) or
> NIR (National).
>
> ...note that no AfriNIC's Resource Member is a GIR (Global Internet
> Registry) but all are LIRs (Local
> Internet Registries) established/approved to serve
> their local economic zone and free to deploy their business accross the
> whole AfriNIC's service
> region, wherever they can extend it; legally speaking.
>
>
> You are misunderstanding the nature of the term LIR here.
>
> There is nothing in AFRINIC’s governing documents 

Re: [Community-Discuss] ICANN ( NRO ) vs LARUS (NRA)

[Arnaud AMELINA]

@Noah +100. Yeah we need his sentiments on that. Please answer,
Owen, now we can understand you resignation from ARIN's AC, hu
interesting things Waiting for your reaction on that.

Le lun. 2 août 2021 à 08:26, Noah  a écrit :

> Owen,
>
> I have some questions for you...
>
> On Sun, 1 Aug 2021, 20:43 Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss, <
> community-discuss@afrinic.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> While people often mistake ICANN for some form of authority, the reality
>> is that for number
>> resources, ICANN is a puppet at the end of the strings pulled by the NRO
>> (which acts in the
>> role of ICANN ASO).
>>
>
> Your association with LARUS has really got you off the rails.
>
> No wonder Larus has created the so called purported organization called
> the *Number Resource Alliance* aka NRA  whose website is
> https://www.nra.help/
>
> Since you claim that ICANN is a puppet of the NRO, and not an authority,
> is that why your LARUS which is linked to Cloud Innovation Ltd created this
> so called *NRA* organisation.
>
> Are IPv4 brokers now forming their own system?  Against ICANN and the NRO?
>
> I ask because your sentiments that ICANN is a puppet are really wanting.
>
> Cheers,
> Noah
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] The "rights" of Cloud Innovation

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Pas tout à fait vrai Ronald, quand tu lis le RSA, il fait clairement
recours au Bylaws et au CPM, donc prétendre que seul le RSA relie Afrinic à
CI, s'est faire preuve de mauvaise fois et limité le champ d'action des
autres textes qui sont bel et bien liés. Merci de relire aussi le RSA tu y
apprendrais beaucoup aussi.

Bonne journée.

--
Arnaud

Le lun. 2 août 2021 à 03:02, Ronald F. Guilmette  a
écrit :

> In message <6462fac5-01d2-4121-80d7-1765a65dc...@delong.com>,
> Owen DeLong  wrote:
>
> >OK, for the sake of argument, what would you have AFRINIC do to ensure
> >the protection of Cloud Innovations rights in that process?
>
> Cloud Innovation's legal rights in the case of a breach of the terms
> of the RSA by AFRINIC are fully spelled out in the text of the RSA
> itself.
>
> I respectfully suggest that you and all of the other amateur lawyers
> on this mailing list should try reading the RSA.  Who knows?  You might
> actually learn something.
>
>
> Regards,
> rfg
>
>
> P.S. The RSA is the one and only legally binding agreement that
> creates -any- legal connection between Cloud Innovation and
> AFRINIC.
>
> Contrary to some popular misconceptions, Cloud Innovation is *NOT*
> a stockholder or shareholder of AFRINIC.  Thus, I say one more time
> for those who continue to deny simple reality, the RSA is the one
> and only legally binding connection between the parties.  Everything
> else is just smoke and mirrors.
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] South Africa ISPA Statement on Recent AFRINIC developments

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Erreur d'interprétation de la notion de souveraineté numérique. Cette
souveraineté s'applique au contenu pas au support. Les ressources critiques
que gère Afrinic sont destinés à un usage Africain, pour la région
africaine. Mais les contenus peuvent être visibles de partout
(accessibilité mondiale). Pas de confusion, merci.

--
Arnaud

Le dim. 1 août 2021 à 14:54, Lamiaa Chnayti  a
écrit :

> Permettez-moi de rectifier qu'il ne s'agit pas de souveraineté numérique
> africaine, mais plutôt de connectivité mondiale. Internet est global. Étant
> moi-même africaine, s'il existe une telle chose appelée souveraineté
> numérique africaine, je suppose qu'il existe des choses comme la
> souveraineté numérique européenne, la souveraineté latino-américaine etc..
> Et comme ça nous commencerons à nous fixer tous des limites, ce qui veut
> dire que nous ne devrions probablement pas accéder à des sites Web qui sont
> sous la souveraineté d’autres régions.
>
> Cordialement,
> Lamiaa
>
>
> On Sun, 1 Aug 2021 at 07:29, Ousmane Ly  wrote:
>
>> Dear Noah.
>> Congratulations for your action on african digital sovregnity! I am very
>> Proud of your actions. You have our support.
>> Best
>> =
>> Dr Ousmane Ly
>> Consultant en Santé Publique, Globale/Mondiale, Digitale/Numérique et
>> Connectée
>> Tel Mobile : +223 76 13 44 70 accessible en roaming
>> =
>> Ce message électronique ainsi que toutes les pièces jointes est destiné à
>> être reçu uniquement par les personnes autorisées à recevoir les
>> informations confidentielles qu'il peut contenir. Toute diffusion,
>> publication, totale ou partielle ou divulgation sous quelque forme que ce
>> soit non expressément autorisées de ce message, sont interdites. Veuillez
>> ne pas lire, copier, transférer ou stocker ce message si vous n’êtes pas un
>> destinataire attendu de celui-ci. Si vous avez reçu ce message par erreur,
>> veuillez le transférer à l’expéditeur et le supprimer complètement de votre
>> système informatique.
>>
>>
>> Le dim. 1 août 2021 à 02:12, Noah  a écrit :
>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 31 Jul 2021, 21:52 Owen DeLong,  wrote:
>>>

 Had AFRINIC stuck to its governing documents as written, rather than
 choosing
 to invent restrictions which are not codified therein
>>>
>>>
>>> I refer you to the Resource Services Agreement Section 4(c)(i) whose
>>> wordings are totally clear and unambiguous.
>>>
>>>
>>> While I am not a fan of some of the things Cloud Innovation has
 done,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ooh Owen you know what... just enjoy your paycheck from Cloud
>>> Innovation.
>>>
>>> The things they have done are known and we don't need you to remind the
>>> community.
>>>
>>>
>>> I see an RIR that does not operate according to its governing documents

>>>
>>> I refer you to the Resource Services Agreement Section 4(c)(i) whose
>>> wordings are totally clear and unambiguous.
>>>
>>> Noah
>>> ___
>>> Members-Discuss mailing list
>>> members-disc...@afrinic.net
>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
>>>
>> ___
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Call for AFRINIC’s registry service migration to other RIRs

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Andrew, Andrew, Andrew,

Tu reste égal à toi même, tu changeras apparemment jamais, pour devenir un
peu plus sage.

Cette proposition ne me surprend pas du tout car tu fais partie des amis du
patron de CI, tu étais au bord quand l'autorisation de lui attribuer les
ressources supplémentaires, tu faisais partie aussi de ceux qui ont
combattu la proposition de politique sur Review, parce que cette politique
allait montrer certainement au grands jours cette magouille.

Demander de ratifier ou de mettre en place une politique de transfert pour
que ceux qui ce sentent menacer par la cabale engendrée par ton ami,
partent avec les ressources d'Afrinic vers un autre registre, c'est triste
et lamentable.

S'ils ce sentent menacer qu'ils aillent prendre leur ressources à
l'extérieur là où le transfert est permis ou, au prêt des brokers, personne
ne les blamera; mais les ressources d'Afrinic restent en Afrique n'en
déplaise à quiconque.

Celui qui n'est pas content du service d'Afrinic il peut aller voir
ailleurs. Surtout s'il n'appartient pas à la communauté internet africaine.

--
Arnaud

Le dim. 1 août 2021 à 13:14, Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss@afrinic.net> a écrit :

> Hi Noah,
>
> Unfortunately an inbound transfer policy does not in any way shape or form
> mitigate the risks articulated in the TISPA, ISPA-ZA or Mauritian press
> statements by AfriNIC.
>
> It is my belief that members should be permitted to transfer away from the
> risks articulated should they feel such risk justifies such.
>
> Again - if the support is there and members do not feel such risk is
> indeed valid - such a transfer policy will impose no risk on AfriNIC - it
> will however let members make the choice of what is right for their
> respective businesses and is in the best interests of members
>
> Andrew
>
> Get Outlook for iOS 
> --
> *From:* Noah 
> *Sent:* Sunday, August 1, 2021 4:06:29 PM
> *To:* Andrew Alston 
> *Cc:* Taiwo Oye ; Paul Wollner <
> paul.woll...@africaoncloud.net>; Community Discuss <
> community-discuss@afrinic.net>; Members Discuss <
> members-disc...@afrinic.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [Community-Discuss] Call for AFRINIC’s registry service
> migration to other RIRs
>
>
> On Sun, 1 Aug 2021, 15:43 Andrew Alston via Community-Discuss, <
> community-discuss@afrinic.net> wrote:
>
>
> Let those who wish to run the risks of staying with AfriNIC through this
> situation do so
>
> - let those who choose not to accept the risk profile transfer out -
> problem solved.
>
>
> https://afrinic.net/policy/archive/inbound-transfer-policy
>
> Noah
> PS: confusion of the highest order.
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] South Africa ISPA Statement on Recent AFRINIC developments

[Arnaud AMELINA]

I would like to invite the community to stop responding to the CI Staff on
this matter.  I have the impression that they are using us to find
fallacious arguments to use against Afrinic while seeking to stuff our
heads with their mistaken and incongruous understanding of Afrinic's
texts.  The case is before justice, we just have to support Afrinic and
ignore the henchmen of CI in their games of destruction and lies.

French :

Je voudrais inviter la communauté à ne plus répondre au Staff de CI sur
cette affaire. J'ai l'impression qu'il nous utilise pour trouver des
arguments fallacieux à utiliser contre Afrinic tout en cherchant à nous
bourrer le crâne deleur compréhension erronée et incongrue des textes
d'Afrinic. L'affaire est devant la justice, soutenons Afrinic et ignorons
les sbires de CI à leur jeux de destruction et de mensonge.

Regards

--
Arnaud


Le sam. 31 juil. 2021 à 18:54, Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss@afrinic.net> a écrit :

>
>
> > On Jul 30, 2021, at 23:27 , Ish Sookun 
> wrote:
> >
> > Not only this situation allowed to us to know who is supporting AFRINIC
> but
> > also bring forward those who would not hesitate to destroy the
> organization
> > for commercial end.
> >
>
> I think you are confused. Certainly, at no point have I sought the
> destruction of
> AFRINIC. Indeed, any potential destruction of AFRINIC is the direct result
> of the
> inevitable reaction when AFRINIC sought to destroy another company and that
> company availed itself of the legal system in defense of its contractual
> rights.
>
> Had AFRINIC stuck to its governing documents as written, rather than
> choosing
> to invent restrictions which are not codified therein and use those as an
> artifice
> to take adverse action against a resource member, there would be no basis
> for any of the current legal claims by Cloud Innovation.
>
> I still do not seek the destruction of AFRINIC, but rather the correction
> of its
> behaviors. While I am not a fan of some of the things Cloud Innovation has
> done, I see an RIR that does not operate according to its governing
> documents
> as a much greater threat to the community than anything any resource member
> has or could do.
>
> Owen
>
> > Regards,
> >
> > --
> > Ish Sookun
> >
> > On Friday, 30 July 2021 22:49:36 +04 Sami Salih wrote:
> >> Thanks Noah this is really important, we need to know who is supporting
> our
> >> organization in this hard time.
> >>
> >> Get Outlook for
> >> Android
> >>
> >> 
> >> From: Noah 
> >> Sent: Friday, July 30, 2021 2:35:38 PM
> >> To: AfriNIC Discuss ; General Discussions
> of
> >> AFRINIC  Subject: [Community-Discuss]
> South
> >> Africa ISPA Statement on Recent AFRINIC developments
> >>
> >> Dear Members and the wider AFRICAN Community.
> >>
> >> I note that the ISP Association of South Africa has made a public
> statement
> >> as well following TISPA'S public statement on recent AFRINIC
> developments.
> >>
> >> I thought it was important to share the same with the rest of you in
> case
> >> you missed this important message since ISPA South Africa represents the
> >> large voice of AFRINIC members in South Africa.
> >>
> >> So for those who are trying to show doubt that there is a loss of
> confidence
> >> in AFRINIC, the statement from ISPA-ZA should show you all that the
> >> industry representative body for ISPs in South Africa does not suffer
> from
> >> a loss of faith in AFRINIC.
> >>
> >> You can read the important statement via the link below.
> >>
> >>
> https://ispa.org.za/press_releases/ispa-statement-on-recent-afrinic-developments
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Noah
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Community-Discuss mailing list
> > Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Call for AFRINIC’s registry service migration to other RIRs

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Lol, Oooh that's sad when people don't absolutely understand nothing.
People have shot an arrow, they don't even know if their opponent is hit,
they start digging his grave.  Without knowing if the latter does not have
a shield that would return their own projectile to their face.

They want to bury Afrinic without even making sure their complaints hit
their target.  Just manage your boss's current problems and let Afrinic
handle the constraints you create.

Be reassured your Boss needs your advice more than Afrinic.

AFRINIC EN AVANT !!!

French :

Ahahaha ah ! Oooh que s'est triste, quand les gens ne comprennent
absolument rien. Les gens ont tiré une flèche, ils ne savent même pas si
leur adversaire est touché, ils commencent à creuser sa tombe. Sans savoir
si ce dernier n'a pas un bouclier qui leur renverrait leur propre
projectile à la figure.

Ils veulent enterrer Afrinic sans même s'assurer que leurs plaintes ont
atteint leur cible.

Contentez-vous de gérer les problèmes actuels de votre patron et laissez
Afrinic gérer les contraintes que vous avez créer. Soyez rassurer votre
Patron à plus besoin de vos conseils qu' Afrinic.

AFRINIC EN AVANT !!!

Bon courage.

--
Arnaud

Le sam. 31 juil. 2021 à 14:25, Ibeanusi Elvis  a
écrit :

> Like everyone here, I believe that we share a common denominator and idea,
> which is centered on the success, longevity and the continued functionality
> of the AFRINIC. Hence, with the present condition and situation that the
> RIR being AFRINIC is in financially, an assistance through the NRO RIR
> Stability Fund would be an option to utilize until our internet registry
> the AFRINIC RIR is stable and functional to the fullest. Thus, this concept
> of “destruction” as regards to the AFRINIC should not be something we
> should be thinking of and inferring at this point.
>
> Elvis.
>
> On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 22:55 Thizwilondi Malupa 
> wrote:
>
>> I can confidently say that , in this community we all want the best for
>> AFRINIC , at the current moment they are  in a financial distress , which I
>> believe , also stated by Paul , AFRINIC is already struggling with the
>> registry functionality. Right now , the solution that can bring up
>> stability and ensure AFRINIC operations are not entirely affected is to
>> look at the  NRO RIR Stability Fund. It was established for situations like
>> this , so it would be best for NRO to take over for the moment , until
>> AFRINIC can sort out their financial crisis . If AFRINIC becomes
>> completely disrupted of their functionality , the community will be also
>> affected that much.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ishmael
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 11:16 PM Paul Wollner <
>> paul.woll...@africaoncloud.net> wrote:
>>
>>> The concerns expressed by TISPA, as well as other concerned parties and
>>> especially by AFRINIC's  own admission in the news outlet lexpress.mu,
>>> which is attached to this email, regarding the AFRINIC’s inability to keep
>>> providing its core registry functions due to its inability to meet its
>>> financial requirements.
>>>
>>> I suggest that in order not hold end users, ISPs and any other
>>> business's hostage, for the interest of continue service of AFRINIC’s core
>>> registry service, we should urgently call for NRO fulfil their
>>> responsibility as well as commitment to the global internet to take over
>>> AFRINIC’s registration service for the time being, until litigation is
>>> settled some time later. (
>>> https://www.nro.net/accountability/rir-accountability/joint-rir-stability-fund/
>>> )
>>>
>>> That way, no end user or business will ever impacted however results
>>> come out of litigation.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Paul Wollner
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>>> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>>
>> ___
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Call for AFRINIC’s registry service migration to other RIRs

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Le jeu. 29 juil. 2021 à 21:16, Paul Wollner 
a écrit :

> The concerns expressed by TISPA, as well as other concerned parties and
> especially by AFRINIC's  own admission in the news outlet lexpress.mu,
> which is attached to this email, regarding the AFRINIC’s inability to keep
> providing its core registry functions due to its inability to meet its
> financial requirements.
>
> I suggest that in order not hold end users, ISPs and any other business's
> hostage, for the interest of continue service of AFRINIC’s core registry
> service, we should urgently call for NRO fulfil their responsibility as
> well as commitment to the global internet to take over AFRINIC’s
> registration service for the time being, until litigation is settled some
> time later. (
> https://www.nro.net/accountability/rir-accountability/joint-rir-stability-fund/
> )
>

Comme je l'ai écrit tout à l'heure, cette requête se fera dans tes rêves.
Il n'y a pour le moment aucune urgence à l'horizon, ceux qui doivent
s'inquiéter sont ceux qui intentent des procès contre Afrinic.

>
> That way, no end user or business will ever impacted however results come
> out of litigation.
>

Ça n'arrivera pas ...


> Regards
> Paul Wollner
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] STATEMENT OF TANZANIA ISP ASSOCIATION (TISPA) - Regarding AFRINIC

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Ahahahahahahahah..Paul, Paul, Paul...

Le jeu. 29 juil. 2021 à 20:52, Paul Wollner 
a écrit :

> Noah,
>
> TISPA does not in anyway express their support for AFRINIC’s litigation,
> your message is highly misleading.
>
> They are however merely expressing concerns for the continuity of AFRINIC
> service, and as AFRINIC said themselves and expressed in NRO website, the
> other four RIR's will ensure core registration service remain as it is, so
> even AFRINIC’s bankruptcy will not result in any disruption of its service.
> No ISP or end user will be impacted.
>
> As AFRINIC is currently charging the highest fees among RIRs, if any of
> the other four RIR's would take over, surely this benefits African ISPs and
> ultimately, end users, with lower RIR fees and a better more stable service?
>
> I for one call that at this stage, AFRINIC should be seriously looking
> into ways transition it’s service to other RIRs to mitigate the risk that
> they have mentioned today to the press.
>

Dans tes rêves oui. Jusque-là rien est encore dit, et tu tire des
conclusions hâtives, dans le format théorie du Chaos ???
Ça n'aura pas lieu. Mais c'est ton droit de rêver, continues dans tes rêves
. Bon courage

--
Arnaud


> Regards
> Paul Wollner
>
>
>
>  On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 20:32:13 +0200 *Noah  >* wrote 
>
> Dear Members/AFRINIC
>
> Please find attached the statement of the Tanzania Internet Service
> Providers Association (*TISPA*) in support of AFRINIC in the wake of
> AFRINIC bank accounts being frozen which is a concern that resonates with
> us.
>
> *NOTE*: TISPA is an AFRINIC Member and also represents 22 AFRINIC
> Resource Members in Tanzania who are TISPA Members.
>
> Link to the statement is also available online on the link below.
>
>
> https://tispa.or.tz/news/statement-of-tanzania-isp-association-tispa-regarding-afrinic
>
> Cheers,
> *Noah*
>
> ___
> Members-Discuss mailing list
> members-disc...@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
>
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Correction to my previous email

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Le mer. 28 juil. 2021 à 22:54, Paul Hjul  a écrit :

> Dear Members,
>> In times of uncertainty and misinformation even the smallest detail can
>> be used to confuse and disrupt even further.
>> I do not want to contribute to the confusion so allow me to try again to
>> convey a more accurate message.
>> Yesterday, while shooting the video with the update on freezing our bank
>> accounts, AFRINIC had not yet received the Judge's Order regarding our
>> application for discharge or variation of the freezing order.
>>
>> https://afrinic.net/20210727-ceo-addresses-freezing-of-afrinic-financial-accounts
>>  <
>> https://afrinic.net/20210727-ceo-addresses-freezing-of-afrinic-financial-accounts
>> >
>> I was only made aware of the Judge's Order minutes before sending out the
>> email.
>>
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2021-July/004338.html
>>  <
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2021-July/004338.html
>> >
>> However, I have failed to mention in my email, for the sake of
>> completeness, that the Judge had declined our prayers and I simply
>> mentioned that the matter has been fixed for the 4th of August for the
>> other parties to communicate their stand. This omission on my part was not
>> in any way intentional.
>>
>> My team and I are working on resolving this whole situation as soon as
>> possible. We are humbled and honored by the huge amount of support we are
>> seeing from our membership that are our partners in building Africa’s
>> digital future.
>> I appreciate your kind understanding on the matter.
>> Kind Regards,
>> Eddy Kayihura
>> Chief Executive Officer, AFRINIC
>> ceo at afrinic.net
>>  > at afrinic.net
>> >
>
>
> This is greatly appreciated and in all honesty I fear that it is
> profoundly unjust that a CEO of an organization the size of Afrinic and
> with the need to have a "legal department" is put into the position in
> which  the CEO is being put into. The misstep is clearly unintentional and
> completely understandable. This is especially because of matters around sub
> iudice rules and undoubtedly many of the issues which give rise to legal
> proceedings predate the term of office of the inumbent CEO. I have little
> fear in suggesting that at least some of the mess has been created as a
> result of the organization acting terribly daftly - either as to the merits
> of a position or in not grasping commercial realities and litigation
> strategy that would follow.
>
Ça c'est ton opinion, pas forcément ce que toi tu penses, avec prêt de 5
affaires pendantent en justices toutes Intentées par ton client, il y a de
quoi à être débordé. Mais ce qui n'est pas forcément le cas, on ne sait pas
ce qui s'est passé, pas besoin d'interprétation ou d'insinuation.

>
> My worry is that the community is not aligning itself with the reality of
> the ramifications of relying on the stability fund:
> https://www.nro.net/accountability/rir-accountability/joint-rir-stability-fund/
>
> I find it difficult to understand why the RIRs which have pledged
> considerably more to the stability fund will be satisfied with the need to
> release funds to preserve Afrinic persisting in litigation with members
> that is seeped in a regionalist ideological overlay. The fact that the
> stability fund is not to allow an RIR to do as it pleases but rather to
> ensure global stability means that a fundamental string of promoting a
> global open Internet is inevitable.
>
Là aussi c'est ton interprétation et ton opinion, qui ne sont pas forcément
la réalité du texte.

>
> If anything the best utilization of funds coming from RIPE (primarily - as
> RIPE is the most committed to the stability) would be on policy development
> and I anticipate that if emergency measures to stabilize Afrinic take the
> form of policy development suggestions from RIPE that this will immediately
> become a political taboo. Hopefully the Board and management will quickly
> make it very clear that partnership in "building Africa's digital future"
> means collaboration of a global nature. It means devising consensus and
> action that is aimed at promoting a true digital future and distancing from
> the deleterious xenophobic and regionalist attitudes and discourse that
> flares up. The purpose of RIRs is to promote the development of the global
> Internet within regions, it is not to carve up the Internet into regions.
>

Inter-net (INTERconnected NETwork) et non pas LAN, c'est l'interconnexion
de plusieurs regeaux différents, région (localisation) technologie, etc.
qui font de l'intérêt ce qui est. Je précise bien que les ressources
allouées par IANA sont bien régionales et non global, cette pilule que tu
tentes de nous faire avaler ne passera pas. Rappelles toi les principes des
points d'échange que tout le monde souhaite avoir même à un niveau national
à plus forte raison 

Re: [Community-Discuss] Share About Cloud Innovation Ltd and their business

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Le mer. 28 juil. 2021 à 21:27, Ronald F. Guilmette 
a écrit :

> In message ,
> Owen DeLong  wrote:
>
> >We have already agreed that the original justification is no longer
> relevant
>
> What is this "we" Owen?  Is that the royal "we"?  Because *I* certainly
> have no recollection that *I* ever agreed that the original justification
> that was used as the basis for Cloud Innovation being granted two /11
> blocks and two /12 blocks is "no longer relevant".
>

Hu c'est grave, très grave même. On appelle ça de la tricherie, ou
fausses déclarations (passible du retrait automatique des ressources
allouées, c'est écrit dans le RSA). Si le besoin initial à changé, il est
aussi écrit que les ressources doivent être retourner à Afrinic.


>
> And given what we now know... largely due to my work... about all of the
> funny business that occurred at AFRINIC between, say, 2010 and February,
> 2015... the same time period when much or all of "The Great AFRINIC Heist"
> happened... AND given the absolute and complete lack of public information
> about how Cloud Innovation's allocations came to be in the first place,
> I, for one, remain deeply curious about everything related to how those
> allocations came to be made, back in 2013 and 2014.
>

Oui en effet on se rappelle bien de cette période où le Board entrait dans
le Mico-management d'Afrinic, et jouait quasiment le Rôle du CEO, sans que
ce dernier ne réclame son droit, car ce sont eux qui l'ont recruté face à
un Candidat hors du commun, respect de la communauté Internet mondiale. Il
avait donc peut-être peur pour son poste.


> The only scrap of information that has, so far, been made pubic about that
> decision process is that the decision(s) to grant Cloud Innovation two
> /11 blocks and two /12 blocks were NOT made by the Board at the time,
> but rather by "staff".  (Well, anyway, there were some public mailing
> list messages to that effect at the time.)
>

Je n'en suis pas sûr, même si le CEO de cette période, se laissait
suppléanter par le Board. Je pari que le Board a fait valoir son veto pour
que cette requête passe, avec la complicité de certains membres du staff,
qu'on voyait en ce temps là participer à des dîners organisés par CI. Ils
se connaissent et ont intérêt à ce que les intérêts d'Afrinic soient bien
préservés actuellement, sinon on va les dénoncer ici pour que tout le monde
sache qui ils sont et ce qu'ils ont fait à notre Afrique (notre chez nous).



>
> Regards,
> rfg
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Share About Cloud Innovation Ltd and their business

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Le mar. 27 juil. 2021 à 22:38, Ronald F. Guilmette 
a écrit :

> In message ,
> Barry Macharia  wrote:
>
> >This is loud and clear
> >
> >Afrinic resource are meant for African region, is that also loud and
> clear too.
>
> No, actually, it isn't.  And that's the problem.
>
> I am not here to defend Lu Heng or Cloud Innovantion, but as I understand
> it, Lu Heng's claim is a simple one:  He successfully met all of the
> requirements, as necessary, in order to request and to receive, from
> AFRINIC, all of the 6,291,456 IPv4 addresses that AFRINIC did in fact
> assign to him, as of the dates when he received these allocations, which
> were four different dates in 2013 and 2014.  He further contends that
> there is no legal basis, either within the RSA that he signed, or
>

Cette assertion n'est pas correct, les textes d'Afrinic sont assez clair et
étaient basés sur la bonne foi des membres à respecter les principes de
base, de la bonne pratique et non sur certains capitalistes véreux qui ont
des agendas cachés. C'est pourquoi certaines conditions qui normalement
étaient d'office compris par les parties, n'ont pas à être transcrit dans
le RSA au risque en le faisant d'avoir un document aussi gros qu'une bible.
Ce membre a profiter de certaines familles (chemin pas très correct) pour
obtenir les ressources qu'il a avec l'aide de certains membres corrompu du
staff et du Board qui se connaissent très bien.

Cela ne change pas que la procédure d'obtention n'a pas été propre, clean.


within the AFRINIC Bylaws, or within any community-apporved policies
> which would allow AFRINIC to now withdraw those allocations in 2021.
>
> 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.
>

Ceci aussi n'est pas correct, c'est faire preuve de mauvaise foi que
d'interpréter les textes d'Afrinic dans ce sens. Il faut tenir compte de
l'historique de l'attribution des ressources. Elles sont belles et bien
régionales et non globales. Ceci est incontestable même par toi Ronald.
Donc ce n'est parce qu'il a mal interprété les textes d'Afrinic qu'il a
raison.

>
> 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.
>

Non personne ne fait de jugement mais chacun présente son opinion
personnelle. On peut se tromper mais les arguments historiques sont
indélébiles, on en peut pas ne pas en tenir compte.

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.


C'est surprenant que l'aspect historique t'échappe à se point sauf si ta
mémoire est brusquement devenue sélective. Les registres sont tous appelés
Registre Régionaux, par conséquence sémantique, toutes leurs activités sont
régionales et les ressources dont elles ont la charge sont réservées à leur
région, pour que ces ressources se retrouvent dans une autre région, il
faut une politique de transfert inter-region duement ratifiée. Ce qui n'est
pas le cas d'Afrinic. Par conséquent ces ressources doivent être utilisées
uniquement dans sa région sauf conditions exceptionnelles accordées par
d'Afrinic.

Nous avons vu comment des gens ont voulu faire passer une telle politique
par des voies controversées, mais qui a échoué heureusement.

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 speculations and fervent beliefs of the rest of us, as
> expressed on this mailing list, will, in the end, be rather entirely
> irrelevant.
>

Merci Ronald de ne pas glisser dans tes informations souvent plausibles,
des informations erronées ou non fondées.

>
>
>
>
> Regards,
> rfg
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Share About Cloud Innovation Ltd and their business

[Arnaud AMELINA]

@Noah +1

Le mar. 27 juil. 2021 à 18:41, Noah  a écrit :

>
>
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 7:32 PM Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss <
> community-discuss@afrinic.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>> Where is your basis in policy for this?
>>
>
> Let me attempt to answer your fake question with links that show AFRINIC
> members from some of the 54 AFRICAN countries with real networks in AFRICA.
>
> https://bgp.he.net/country/KE
> https://bgp.he.net/country/TZ
> https://bgp.he.net/country/ZA
> https://bgp.he.net/country/NG
> https://bgp.he.net/country/MU
>
> Or wait... I can not find this so-called LIR *Cloud Innovation Limited* with
> offices in Seychelles using this BGP tool.
>
>
> *https://bgp.he.net/country/SC *
>
> You try so hard to pretend with your alternative reality in your quest to
> defend Heng Lu and his IP ADDRESS SOLUTIONS business run under his
> subsidiary HongKong company Larus  https://www.larus.net/
>
> FYI... "AFRINIC has never approved any application for IP space for the
> purpose of leasing despite having received such requests."
>
>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2021-February/003907.html
>
> Cheers,
> Noah
> PS: The ALLOCATION POLICY is linked to the AFRINIC BYLAWS which are both
> linked to the AFRINIC RSA.
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Update on legal case

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hu!

Toi je ne t'en veut pas du tout, j'ai juste pitié. Tu ne fais que ton
travail, défendre ton employeur, donc tout ce que tu peux dire ou faire
m'importe très peu.

Bon courage à toi.

./

Le dim. 25 juil. 2021 à 11:26, Lamiaa Chnayti  a
écrit :

> Ah du coup on est censés féliciter et encourager l’utilisation de fonds et
> de moyens dont on ignore la source rien que pour assurer la continuité des
> services ?
>
> Le mail du board pouvait facilement être accompagné de détails sur la
> nature des fonds utilisés. Pourquoi l'anonymat ? Il est normal que les
> membres de la list commencent à lire entre les lignes et à trouver un
> raisonnement logique vu qu’il manque de transparence et de clarté.
>
> Bref, au risque de répéter ce que d’autres membres on déjà dit, je résume
> ma position en la fameuse citation :
>
> *"La fin ne justifie pas les moyens" **-Michel Houellebecq*
>
> Lamiaa
>
>
>
> On Sun, 25 Jul 2021 at 09:54, Arnaud AMELINA  wrote:
>
>> Hu! Je suis vraiment surpris par la réaction de certains membres on
>> diraient qu'ils font tout pour voir Afrinic échouer dans sa gestion, mais
>> ce sont eux qui échoueront. Au lieu de féliciter le Board d'avoir trouver
>> le moyen quelqu'il soit d'assurer la continuité des services, vous vous
>> plaignez de la transparence sans même attendre que le rapport de leur
>> réunion ne soit disponible. On vous demande un peu d'indulgence vis à vis
>> du Board qui fait de son mieux.
>>
>> N'en déplaise à ce qui cherche à se réjouir de leur hypothétique échec.
>>
>> FELLICITATION ET BON COURAGE AU BOARD. ON VOUS SOUTIENT.
>>
>> --
>> Arnaud
>>
>> Le dim. 25 juil. 2021 à 05:36, Paul Wollner <
>> paul.woll...@africaoncloud.net> a écrit :
>>
>>> Dear Chair,
>>>
>>> Would you care to share with the community where this alternative source
>>> of funding is coming from? Are these funds coming from other AFRINIC
>>> reserves?
>>>
>>> How will this impact the day to day operations in AFRINIC?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Paul Wollner
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  On Sat, 24 Jul 2021 18:25:40 +0200 * >> >* wrote 
>>>
>>> Dear AFRINIC Members,
>>>
>>> AFRINIC has been notified by one of its bank that its accounts have
>>> been temporary frozen due to legal action by Cloud Innovation
>>> Ltd. AFRINIC has not yet received the relevant information on this
>>> matter showing the basis of Cloud Innovation Ltd's claims, and
>>> AFRINIC has not yet been given the opportunity to respond to this
>>> action. It will, at the first opportunity, exercise all legal rights
>>> available to it before the Court.
>>>
>>> The Board of Directors held an urgent meeting last night. It
>>> identified alternate means of funding so that the company can cover
>>> the financial expenses incurred to run its services.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Subramanian Moonesamy
>>> Chairman,
>>> AFRINIC Board of Directors
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Members-Discuss mailing list
>>> members-disc...@afrinic.net
>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>>> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>>
>> ___
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Update on legal case

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Pour votre gouverne les ressources IP ne sont pas la propriété de ceux a
qui on les a mis à disposition, au risque de me répéter. Vous semez la
confusion au sein de la communauté par vos faux propos.

Les ressources sont mises à la disposition des entités sur la base des
besoins qu'il a exprimé, selon le RSA s'il a menti sur ces déclarations, ou
n'a pas respecté les clauses du RSA, Afrinic peut réclamer ces ressouces
sans aucun préjudice, c'est écrit dans le RSA et les membres signent. Tout
ce que je vois ici, ce sont les soubresauts d'un perdant et il va perdre et
tous ceux qui l'ont soutenu comprendront qu'ils avaient fait fausse route.

J'invite Afrinic à bien préparer sa contre offensive.

À bon entendeur salut

--
Arnaud

Le dim. 25 juil. 2021 à 13:25, Brian Sowers  a
écrit :

> If anything, the frozen bank account should be the final nail in the
> coffin for AFRINIC’s realization that it made a serious mistake with
> Cloud’s IP space. Now for this alternate means of funding, I think it’s
> crucial for the community to understand how stable they are. And with this
> understanding, the source of these funds comes naturally. Who knows how
> long this legal battle will last?
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Update on legal case

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hu! Je suis vraiment surpris par la réaction de certains membres on
diraient qu'ils font tout pour voir Afrinic échouer dans sa gestion, mais
ce sont eux qui échoueront. Au lieu de féliciter le Board d'avoir trouver
le moyen quelqu'il soit d'assurer la continuité des services, vous vous
plaignez de la transparence sans même attendre que le rapport de leur
réunion ne soit disponible. On vous demande un peu d'indulgence vis à vis
du Board qui fait de son mieux.

N'en déplaise à ce qui cherche à se réjouir de leur hypothétique échec.

FELLICITATION ET BON COURAGE AU BOARD. ON VOUS SOUTIENT.

--
Arnaud

Le dim. 25 juil. 2021 à 05:36, Paul Wollner 
a écrit :

> Dear Chair,
>
> Would you care to share with the community where this alternative source
> of funding is coming from? Are these funds coming from other AFRINIC
> reserves?
>
> How will this impact the day to day operations in AFRINIC?
>
> Regards
> Paul Wollner
>
>
>
>
>
>  On Sat, 24 Jul 2021 18:25:40 +0200 *  >* wrote 
>
> Dear AFRINIC Members,
>
> AFRINIC has been notified by one of its bank that its accounts have
> been temporary frozen due to legal action by Cloud Innovation
> Ltd. AFRINIC has not yet received the relevant information on this
> matter showing the basis of Cloud Innovation Ltd's claims, and
> AFRINIC has not yet been given the opportunity to respond to this
> action. It will, at the first opportunity, exercise all legal rights
> available to it before the Court.
>
> The Board of Directors held an urgent meeting last night. It
> identified alternate means of funding so that the company can cover
> the financial expenses incurred to run its services.
>
> Regards,
>
> Subramanian Moonesamy
> Chairman,
> AFRINIC Board of Directors
>
>
> ___
> Members-Discuss mailing list
> members-disc...@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
>
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] ARIN without Owen Delong ?

[Arnaud AMELINA]

@Taiwo

We all would like to know why Owen, so active in our PDP, has to resign
from his position at ARIN AC  which serves in an advisory capacity to the
Board of Trustees on Internet number resource policy and related matters.

--
Arnaud

Le lun. 12 juil. 2021 à 12:37, Taiwo Oye  a
écrit :

> Benjilo.
> How is this of concern to you or to any of the members of the afrinic
> community. Kindly direct your question to the appropriate quarters -
> o...@delong.com -
>
>
> On Jul 11, 2021, at 19:27, Paschal Ochang  wrote:
>
> Great question Daniel.
>
> On Sunday, July 11, 2021, DANIEL NANGHAKA  wrote:
>
>> Is this worth discussing on the rpd or mailing lists?
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 8:36 PM Marcus K. G. Adomey 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> Out of curiosity, does anyone know  why Owen Delong active in AFRINIC
>>> PDP resigned from ARIN AC?
>>>
>>> https://www.arin.net/about/welcome/ac/meetings/2021_0617/ point 10
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>>> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Kind regards,
>
> Paschal.
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

[afnog] New article shared after Afrinic-33 by Alain

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Dear communities,

Find bellow a link to the new article shared by one of our famous elders
Alain P. AINA, on our last AIS-21 feedback, in order to have a good and
professional view from an experienced and knowledgeable person, who has
good memories of all Afrinic's PPM sessions and other organizations of
Internet Ecosystems in the world and particularly in Africa.


Hope this can help some newcomers to have the best view of our
organizations and communities.


https://www.linkedin.com/posts/alain-aina-1060266_internetgovernance-afrinic-ipaddress-activity-6812650721851379712-VasE


Regards

--
Arnaud
___
afnog mailing list
https://www.afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afnog

Re: [Community-Discuss] Notice to all the legacy netblocks holders in AfriNIC

[Arnaud AMELINA]

>
> AfriNIC staff: has any LIR applied for IP space for the purpose of
> *leasing* and received IP address space?
>
> Thanks,
> Frank
>
> __
>

Question très importante, et espérons une réponse adéquat de la part du
STAFF d'AFRINIC.

Cordialement

Very important question, hope an adequate response from AFRINIC STAFF.

Regards

--
Arnaud


>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Notice to all the legacy netblocks holders in AfriNIC

[Arnaud AMELINA]

I would just offer community consultation..
If you think AFRINIC is misbehaving, prove the legitimacy of your rights to
use the delegated ressources or your control over the legacy resources and
the community will help address your case.

It should be as simple as that.

Regards

!!! *Happy and Wonderful New Year  To All *!!!

--
Arnaud

Le lun. 4 janv. 2021 à 14:27, Ron via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss@afrinic.net> a écrit :

> Request to all AFRINIC members whose resources are confiscated by AFRINIC
> and to those who are having legal issues with AFRINIC.
> Our experienced legal team can help you recover all your resources.
> Litigation is our expertise and we give 100% guarantee on our cases.
> No recovery of resources = NO FEE.
> No advance payment or retainer fee.
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Small Progress

[Arnaud AMELINA]

+1 @Noah

Le sam. 2 janv. 2021 à 10:09, Noah  a écrit :

> Ronald,
>
> Don't mind the sock puppets and trolls, like my good friend Nishal
> indicated after all its often hard to dispute facts because fact are facts.
>
> Noah
> Your apparent sidekick :-)
>
> On Fri, 1 Jan 2021, 04:57 Ronald F. Guilmette, 
> wrote:
>
>> I am pleased to inform you all that there has been at least some minimal
>> progress with respect to AFRINIC wrestling back control of many or most
>> of the legacy IPv4 blocks that were effectively stolen from their
>> rightful owners by Mr. Cohen, Mr. Uerlings, and others.
>>
>> Quietly, and without any public fanfare, it appears that AFRINIC staff,
>> since around December 19th, have been adding annotations to the WHOIS
>> records of many of these stolen blocks to indicate AFRINIC's recognition
>> that these blocks were in fact stolen.
>>
>> For example, the WHOIS record for the 196.16.0.0/14 block which was
>> stolen
>> from the South African national government's in-house IT arm... formerly
>> called "Infoplan" and long ago renamed to "SITA"... now contains the
>> following annotations:
>>
>> remarks:REMARK===
>> remarks:The custodianship of this IP prefix is presently
>> remarks:deemed to be in dispute. Consequently,
>> remarks:no change request pertaining to this particular
>> remarks:prefix will be entertained by AFRINIC until the
>> remarks:issue is finally resolved between the disputants
>> remarks:themselves or by a competent authority.
>> remarks:Further, whilst the current holder of the said prefix
>> remarks:continues to hold same, AFRINIC shall bear no
>> remarks:responsibility whatsoever in relation thereto and
>> remarks:disputants are encouraged to resolve the said
>> remarks:dispute expeditiously.
>> remarks:REMARK
>>
>> The AFRINIC WHOIS history of this block is shown here:
>>
>> https://pastebin.com/raw/m0LVuppe
>>
>> As anyone can clearly see, the block was originally assigned to "Infoplan"
>> in South Africa, even in the AFRINIC records which, in the case of this
>> specific block, have been partially "disappeared" via a process that
>> AFRINIC has yet to explain.
>>
>> Additional records relating to this same block, and which go back even
>> further in time... all the way back to January 28, 1994...  are readily
>> available from ARIN's "WhoWas" historical data service.  These even
>> earlier historical records also confirm 100% that this block was formally
>> assigned to Infoplan (now named SITA) in January, 1994.
>>
>> As anyone can also see from the AFRINIC historical records for this block,
>> the contact mailing address for this block was changed, on or about
>> 2015-01-23, to be an address in the Seychelles Islands.  So you have to
>> ask yourself:  Why would an entity that is part of the South African
>> national government suddely relocate itself to the Seychelles Islands?
>>
>> Obviously, it wouldn't.  That is nonsensical on the face of it.  So what
>> really happened here?
>>
>> There are only two plausible possibilities:  Either (a) the block was
>> simply
>> stolen, by messers Cohen, Uerlings, and Byaruhanga, via some clever and
>> illicit manipluation of the relevant AFRINIC WHOIS records, or else (b)
>> someone within the South African government received some payment in
>> exchange for the legitimate rights to this block... either with or without
>> the knowledge and consent of the South African government itself.
>>
>> Personally, I find the second possibility, (b), to be implausible, not
>> because I believe that South African government officials are universally
>> immune to a little private bribery, but only because I have personally
>> spoken to a number of the other parties and entities that have also and
>> likewise had their legacy AFRINIC IPv4 address blocks stolen out from
>> under them, for example, the South African commercial metals company known
>> as Columbus Stainless (160.115.0.0/16), and also to managers and
>> technical
>> people associated with South Africa's state-owned oil company, Sasol,
>> which also had its 155.237.0.0/16 block "liberated" from their control,
>> temporarily at least, in some still-mysterious way.
>>
>> These are just two examples of the several AFRINIC legacy block holders
>> that have had their stuff stolen, and that I have personally spoken to
>> on multiple occasions.  IN ALL CASES, when I was able to make contact
>> with the real and legitimate legacy block owners those legitimate owners
>> universally expressed astonishment when I informed them that they were
>> no longer in control of their own assigned IP address assets.  Since my
>> initial contacts with these various victim organizations, several of them,
>> including the two mentioned above, as well as the City of Cape Town and
>> others, have moved swiftly to regain control of what was 

Re: [Community-Discuss] Current routing summaries for LiquidWeb, Inc. and Fiber Grid, Inc.

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hello
My mail to you bounced with the following error

==
Address not found

 Your message did not reach mika.lev...@mailfence.com because the address
could not be found or could not receive messages.

Response from the remote server:
550 Mailbox unavailable
==

I wish we continue this conversation as you could be useful to this
community .I did not  know that your “bye bye”  means  I disappear after...

-- 
Arnaud

Le mer. 23 déc. 2020 à 14:20, Mika Levari via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss@afrinic.net> a écrit :

> Shalom,
> I am enjoying this for sometime now. Looks like Afrinic community is
> infiltrated by Spamhaus goons like Ronald F. Guilmette
> Those who do not know what is spamhaus then read this
> https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/29055/spamhaus-tax-evasion-shell-companies-extortion-strategies-blackmail-and-much-much-more
> Spamhaus is a highly sophisticated money laundering, hacking and cyber
> extortion network.
> Spamhaus gang mebers like Ronald F. Guilmette are using social engineering
> and same old tactics.
> This time they are using Afrinic platform.
> One example is https://seclists.org/nanog/2019/Sep/255
> Spamhaus goons started at Nanog and managed to get legal war started
> between Elad cohen and Afrinic.
> Case has reached Supreme court of Mauritius. All the legal fees are paid
> from Afrinic members fee.
> Afrinic management will be answerable for all the legal expenses.
> Afrinic should ban these goons or they will manage to destroy Afrinic by
> triggering series of legal events between Afrinic and its members to
> achieve their purpose.
> Read all replies from Ronald F. Guilmette and his associates and then
> evaluate purpose of their posts.
> Everything will be clear.
> Bye bye
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Current routing summaries for LiquidWeb, Inc. and Fiber Grid, Inc.

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi Mika Levari, you want scare Afrinic and its members that they are
loosing money in attempting to recall fraudulent acquired ressources.
You will be welcome if you could prove some of Ronald’s statements are
false.

Otherwise, the global community and Afrinic membership  are concerned that
AFRINIC not capable to stand in court to defend and recall ressources it is
responsible for.

--
Arnaud

Le mer. 23 déc. 2020 à 14:20, Mika Levari via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss@afrinic.net> a écrit :

> Shalom,
> I am enjoying this for sometime now. Looks like Afrinic community is
> infiltrated by Spamhaus goons like Ronald F. Guilmette
> Those who do not know what is spamhaus then read this
> https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/29055/spamhaus-tax-evasion-shell-companies-extortion-strategies-blackmail-and-much-much-more
> Spamhaus is a highly sophisticated money laundering, hacking and cyber
> extortion network.
> Spamhaus gang mebers like Ronald F. Guilmette are using social engineering
> and same old tactics.
> This time they are using Afrinic platform.
> One example is https://seclists.org/nanog/2019/Sep/255
> Spamhaus goons started at Nanog and managed to get legal war started
> between Elad cohen and Afrinic.
> Case has reached Supreme court of Mauritius. All the legal fees are paid
> from Afrinic members fee.
> Afrinic management will be answerable for all the legal expenses.
> Afrinic should ban these goons or they will manage to destroy Afrinic by
> triggering series of legal events between Afrinic and its members to
> achieve their purpose.
> Read all replies from Ronald F. Guilmette and his associates and then
> evaluate purpose of their posts.
> Everything will be clear.
> Bye bye
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [afnog] Updates on the misappropriation of IPv4 resources

[Arnaud AMELINA]

English version :

Mr Ronald Guilmette,


*If everything you report is true, then, on behalf of the entire AFRINIC
community, I would like to express our gratitude to you. For all the
information provided. We promise to hold accountable the Members of the
Board as well as the CEO and his staff of AFRINIC, for the apparent
inaction to which you refer. *


*In light of what I just read, we understand some knee-jerk reactions from
some members of the community, hum! They are just defending themselves. *


* We will do what is necessary to ensure that what is for AFRINIC returns
to AFRINIC. *

* Good evening to all.*

*Regards *

--
Arnaud



Le jeu. 17 déc. 2020 à 22:59, Arnaud AMELINA  a écrit :

> Monsieur Ronald Guilmette,
>
> Si tout ce que vous rapportez est avéré, alors, je voudrais au nom de
> toute la Communauté d'AFRINIC, vous manifester toute notre gratitude. Pour
> toutes les informations fournies. Nous vous promettons de demander des
> comptes aux Membres du Board ainsi qu'au CEO et son Staff d'AFRINIC, sur
> l'apparente inaction à laquelle vous faites allusion.
>
> À la lumière de tout ce que je viens de lire, nous comprenons certaines
> réactions épidermiques de certains membres de la communauté, hum ! Ils ne
> font que se défendre.
>
> Nous ferons le nécessaire pour que ce qui est à AFRINIC, revienne à
> AFRINIC.
>
>  Bonne soirée à tous.
>
> Cordialement
>
> --
> Arnaud
>
> Le jeu. 17 déc. 2020 à 18:34, Ronald F. Guilmette 
> a écrit :
>
>> I'm sorry friends, but I have to say that this really chaps my hide.
>>
>> Once again we get an "update" from Eddy in which he says... well...
>> absolutely nothing.  He apparently writes just to tell the AFRINIC
>> community that everything is still cloaked in secrecy, I guess because
>> you are all children and can't handle and/or are not entitled to know
>> what's really going on.
>>
>> Unlike Eddy, I certainly have a great many bits of hard-won facts and
>> evidence to share with the community, and I would have done so long
>> before now if I didn't have a life and other pressing matters to
>> attend to, including other Internet-based criminal enterprises that
>> I am actively investigating and working with journalists on, even as
>> we speak.
>>
>> For today, I'll just drop a couple of things on you that you all may
>> perhaps find new and interesting.
>>
>> My friend, juornalist Jan Vermeulen has informed me that according to
>> his calculations (which were based on numbers given to him by Eddy)
>> there are still around one million+ IPv4 addresses that AFRINIC already
>> knows were stolen, and that were NOT included in any of the reports
>> that Jan has published in mybroadband.co.za.  That's one hell of a
>> lot of valuable IPv4 real estate!  So where is it all and why hasn't
>> AFRINIC reclaimed it?  (Note:  I'm not even talking about the stolen
>> legacy blocks, which Eddy and the board are still dragging their feet
>> on, and refusing to do anything about, even after a full year of knowing
>> about those, and even after seeing the compelling evidence that Cohen
>> and Uerlings registered a lot of contact email domains with the clear
>> and deliberate intent to cover up their gigantic theft scheme.)
>>
>> So anyway, I do know where at least some of those other stolen 1 million
>> IP addreses have gone, and I'm frankly stunned that neither Eddy nor
>> anybody else in the AFRINIC hierarchy have lifted a finger to reclaim
>> any of this other IPv4 space that has been stolen.  What are they
>> waiting for?  An engraved invitation?  Do they just need to have either
>> Jan or myself expose thesse additional thefts first, so as to take any
>> possible legal heat off them?
>>
>> I call your attention to the following listing of the historical
>> WHOIS data for the 196.52.0.0/14 block.  Please note that the name "ITC",
>> under which this block was originally registered is one that I and Jan
>> long ago concluded was a totally made-up name for a fake corporate entity
>> that never existed anywhere, and one that was invented out of whole cloth
>> by Ernest Byaruhanga as a kind of WHOIS cover story for many of his
>> thefts...
>> thefts which have now been effectively confirmed by virtue of that fact
>> that AFRINIC has already reclaimed all of the blocks that were still
>> registered to "ITC" as of December of last year.
>>
>> https://pastebin.com/raw/DW4nGii3
>>
>> The bottom line here is clear.  The 196.52.0.0/14 block was another one
>> of Ernest's thefts from the free pool, and one that was subsequently
>> sold or gifted

Re: [Community-Discuss] Cloud Innovation Displays Very Poor, If Not Criminal, Netizenship

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi Owen,
I won’t respond to your intimidation but focus on the real technical
issues. See my response below inline

Le ven. 29 mai 2020 à 00:59, Owen DeLong  a écrit :

> Arnaud,
>
> You are mistaken on a number of points.
>
>
> On May 28, 2020, at 13:05 , Arnaud AMELINA  wrote:
>
> Hi, all communities
>
> It was said that the hijacking of AS37353 was a configuration mistake,
> coupled with poor oversight in checking the right to use of the ASN by a
> certain IPDC customer.
>
> It was also said that this would have been facilitated by old and stalled
> IRR objects from MacroLAN before the service contract ended in December
> 2019.
>
> It was also stated that the BGP announcement was stopped and some actions
> taken to delete the stalled routing registry object from IRR.
>
>
> Yes… The registry objects created by MacroLAN have been deleted.
>
> Below  are some data which gives some extra information and confirm
> previous claim that this incident was not accidental.
>
>
> Below is some very redacted data which gives virtually no information.
>
> NB: All data are collected from their source, Today, 28 May 2020, at 10:00
> UTC.
>
> IRRs created in March 2020 with AS37353 as Origin for 156.241.3.0/24 by
> HGC
>
>  $ whois -h whois.radb.net '156.241.3.0/24'
>
> route:  156.241.3.0/24 descr:  Proxy-registered route object
> origin: AS37353 notify: matthew.c...@hgc.com.hk mnt-by:
>  MAINT-HGC-INTL changed:matthew.c...@hgc.com.hk 20200304 source:
>  RADB
>
> =
> route:  156.241.3.0/24
> descr:  Proxy-registered route object origin: AS37353
> remarks:This is a HGC customer route-object
> remarks:which is being exported under this origin AS.
> remarks:
> remarks:This route object was created because no existing
> remarks:route object with the same origin was found.
> remarks:
> remarks:Please contact r...@hutchcity.com if you have any
> remarks:questions regarding this object.
> notify: r...@hutchcity.com
> mnt-by: MAINT-AS9304
> changed:r...@hutchcity.com 20200304
> source: NTTCOM
> 
>
>
> We haven changed anything, but here’s the full text of that whois command:
> ...
> changed:admin@cloudix.online 20200511  #03:10:36Z
> source: RADB
> 0.000u 0.001s 0:00.19 0.0%  0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
> owen (122) ~ %
> 2020/05/28 16:58:53
>
> Looks like there’s additional cruft left in some routing registries that
> we still haven’t removed. I’ve asked people to get on that.
>
>
Good.. this is the reason for my mail.
Draw attention on these route objects which should have never existed on
RADB and get them cleaned up by your customer who is the maintainer of the
route object as per the records.


> However, just because it’s in RADB doesn’t mean it’s advertised.
>

The routing visibility I referred to was not because route objects are in
RADB or in NTT routing registries..

Even though the prefix is no longer seen in global routing table, it is
been seen by some route collectors.

One route collector at RIPE Stat sees as shown in the picture as at now.

[ picture]
And the ASPATH speaks for itself.


> Nonetheless, we are actively working to get those errant entries cleaned
> up. Thank you for bringing them to our attention.
>
> Please let the community know when everything is cleaned.
Thank you

--
Arnaud

...

> ___
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [RPKI-Discuss] Cloud Innovation Displays Very Poor, If Not Criminal, Netizenship

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi, all communities

It was said that the hijacking of AS37353 was a configuration mistake,
coupled with poor oversight in checking the right to use of the ASN by a
certain IPDC customer.

It was also said that this would have been facilitated by old and stalled
IRR objects from MacroLAN before the service contract ended in December
2019.

It was also stated that the BGP announcement was stopped and some actions
taken to delete the stalled routing registry object from IRR.

Below  are some data which gives some extra information and confirm
previous claim that this incident was not accidental.

NB: All data are collected from their source, Today, 28 May 2020, at 10:00
UTC.

IRRs created in March 2020 with AS37353 as Origin for 156.241.3.0/24 by
HGC

 $ whois -h whois.radb.net '156.241.3.0/24'

route:  156.241.3.0/24 descr:  Proxy-registered route object
origin: AS37353 notify: matthew.c...@hgc.com.hk mnt-by:
 MAINT-HGC-INTL changed:matthew.c...@hgc.com.hk 20200304 source:
 RADB

=
route:  156.241.3.0/24
descr:  Proxy-registered route object origin: AS37353
remarks:This is a HGC customer route-object
remarks:which is being exported under this origin AS.
remarks:
remarks:This route object was created because no existing remarks:
  route object with the same origin was found.
remarks:
remarks:Please contact r...@hutchcity.com if you have any remarks:
  questions regarding this object.
notify: r...@hutchcity.com
mnt-by: MAINT-AS9304
changed:r...@hutchcity.com 20200304
source: NTTCOM


https://www.radb.net/query?advanced_query=1=156.241.3.0%2F24&-T+option=_option=&-i+option=

These objects havent been deleted.

An in-depth check of the routing status of 156.241.3.0/24 shows the
followings:

Hurricane Electric BGP tool

https://bgp.he.net/net/156.241.3.0/24

Origin AS  Announcement   Description AS37353
156.241.3.0/24 IRR Valid  HONGKONG LINK INFINITY TECHNOLOGY LIMITED


RIPESTAT

https://stat.ripe.net/widget/looking-glass#w.resource=156.241.3.0%2F24

AS37353 is seen as the origin by 1 peer.

103.200.115.1 ►103.200.115.1 is announcing route AS64271 AS9304 AS4809
AS4809 AS4809 AS134190 AS37353.

Even with the limited view, the prefix is still being originated and routed
and the route objects still exist.

Regards

--
Arnaud

Le sam. 9 mai 2020 à 10:02, Lu Heng  a écrit :

> Due to size of attachment the attachment is not in this list, but you may
> easily find in all the others.
>
> To whom it may concern,
>
> On May 8, Mark Think posted a claim to multiple lists that Cloud
> Innovation was abusing an ASN (37353) that didn’t belong to them (Cloud
> Innovation) but rather belonged to Seacom through their acquisition of
> MacroLAN.
>
> While we regret this unfortunate incident, Mark’s claims that it was
> criminal or bad netizenship on the part of Cloud Innovation is without
> foundation and utterly incorrect.
>
> As shown below in the attached document from Paul Wollner(Ex-CTO of
> Macrolan who created IRR routes to allow Macrolan to announce Cloud
> Innovation's prefix); letter from Link Infinity International Ltd. (Link
> Infinity), A customer of Cloud Innovation; and attached LOA from LARUS
> authorizing IPDC Solutions to announce the prefix with origin AS134190.
> And a Letter from IPDC. This was an innocent mistake committed by third
> parties and had nothing to do with any action by Cloud Innovation or LARUS.
>
> Here’s what happened:
>
> Cloud Innovation delegated a /24 to Link Infinity, an ISP in December 2019.
>
>
> Link Infinity further delegated that same /24 to IPDC and asked Cloud
> innovation to issue an LOA, which we did. The LOA specifically required
> IPDC to use its own ASN to announce the space (AS134190).
>
> IPDC subsequently authorized one of its customers to use the said prefix.
>
>
> For reasons still unknown to Cloud Innovation, IPDC and their customer set
> up a BGP session wherein their customer used AS37353 as the origin to
> advertise prefix 156.241.3.0/24.
>
>
> Upon discovering the announcement, rather than contact Cloud Innovation,
> Mark contacted IPDC who provided him with an incomplete explanation blaming
> their customer and Mark, not realizing that Cloud Innovation was not the
> customer in question posted far and wide about the event. It is unclear to
> us why he chose to do this rather than contact us to try and resolve the
> issue.
>
>
> A contributing factor to the erroneous BGP configuration by IPDC's
> customer may have been data contained in some outdated IRR route objects
> for 156.241.0.0/16 which have subsequently been deleted.
>
> As soon as we became aware of the problem (via Mark’s email), we began to
> investigate the situation. As soon as it was clear that this was the result
> of third-party actions, we reached out to Mark privately to let him know
> what we knew and that we were still investigating. We delayed making a
> public 

Re: [Community-Discuss] Cloud Innovation Displays Very Poor, If Not Criminal, Netizenship

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi, all communities

It was said that the hijacking of AS37353 was a configuration mistake,
coupled with poor oversight in checking the right to use of the ASN by a
certain IPDC customer.

It was also said that this would have been facilitated by old and stalled
IRR objects from MacroLAN before the service contract ended in December
2019.

It was also stated that the BGP announcement was stopped and some actions
taken to delete the stalled routing registry object from IRR.

Below  are some data which gives some extra information and confirm
previous claim that this incident was not accidental.

NB: All data are collected from their source, Today, 28 May 2020, at 10:00
UTC.

IRRs created in March 2020 with AS37353 as Origin for 156.241.3.0/24 by
HGC

 $ whois -h whois.radb.net '156.241.3.0/24'

route:  156.241.3.0/24 descr:  Proxy-registered route object
origin: AS37353 notify: matthew.c...@hgc.com.hk mnt-by:
 MAINT-HGC-INTL changed:matthew.c...@hgc.com.hk 20200304 source:
 RADB

=
route:  156.241.3.0/24
descr:  Proxy-registered route object origin: AS37353
remarks:This is a HGC customer route-object
remarks:which is being exported under this origin AS.
remarks:
remarks:This route object was created because no existing remarks:
  route object with the same origin was found.
remarks:
remarks:Please contact r...@hutchcity.com if you have any remarks:
  questions regarding this object.
notify: r...@hutchcity.com
mnt-by: MAINT-AS9304
changed:r...@hutchcity.com 20200304
source: NTTCOM


https://www.radb.net/query?advanced_query=1=156.241.3.0%2F24&-T+option=_option=&-i+option=

These objects havent been deleted.

An in-depth check of the routing status of 156.241.3.0/24 shows the
followings:

Hurricane Electric BGP tool

https://bgp.he.net/net/156.241.3.0/24

Origin AS  Announcement   Description AS37353
156.241.3.0/24 IRR Valid  HONGKONG LINK INFINITY TECHNOLOGY LIMITED


RIPESTAT

https://stat.ripe.net/widget/looking-glass#w.resource=156.241.3.0%2F24

AS37353 is seen as the origin by 1 peer.

103.200.115.1 ►103.200.115.1 is announcing route AS64271 AS9304 AS4809
AS4809 AS4809 AS134190 AS37353.

Even with the limited view, the prefix is still being originated and routed
and the route objects still exist.

Regards

--
Arnaud

Le sam. 9 mai 2020 à 09:44, Lu Heng  a écrit :

> To whom it may concern,
>
> On May 8, Mark Think posted a claim to multiple lists that Cloud
> Innovation was abusing an ASN (37353) that didn’t belong to them (Cloud
> Innovation) but rather belonged to Seacom through their acquisition of
> MacroLAN.
>
> While we regret this unfortunate incident, Mark’s claims that it was
> criminal or bad netizenship on the part of Cloud Innovation is without
> foundation and utterly incorrect.
>
> As shown below in the attached document from Paul Wollner(Ex-CTO of
> Macrolan who created IRR routes to allow Macrolan to announce Cloud
> Innovation's prefix); letter from Link Infinity International Ltd. (Link
> Infinity), A customer of Cloud Innovation; and attached LOA from LARUS
> authorizing IPDC Solutions to announce the prefix with origin AS134190.
> And a Letter from IPDC. This was an innocent mistake committed by third
> parties and had nothing to do with any action by Cloud Innovation or LARUS.
>
> Here’s what happened:
>
> Cloud Innovation delegated a /24 to Link Infinity, an ISP in December 2019.
>
>
> Link Infinity further delegated that same /24 to IPDC and asked Cloud
> innovation to issue an LOA, which we did. The LOA specifically required
> IPDC to use its own ASN to announce the space (AS134190).
>
> IPDC subsequently authorized one of its customers to use the said prefix.
>
>
> For reasons still unknown to Cloud Innovation, IPDC and their customer set
> up a BGP session wherein their customer used AS37353 as the origin to
> advertise prefix 156.241.3.0/24.
>
>
> Upon discovering the announcement, rather than contact Cloud Innovation,
> Mark contacted IPDC who provided him with an incomplete explanation blaming
> their customer and Mark, not realizing that Cloud Innovation was not the
> customer in question posted far and wide about the event. It is unclear to
> us why he chose to do this rather than contact us to try and resolve the
> issue.
>
>
> A contributing factor to the erroneous BGP configuration by IPDC's
> customer may have been data contained in some outdated IRR route objects
> for 156.241.0.0/16 which have subsequently been deleted.
>
> As soon as we became aware of the problem (via Mark’s email), we began to
> investigate the situation. As soon as it was clear that this was the result
> of third-party actions, we reached out to Mark privately to let him know
> what we knew and that we were still investigating. We delayed making a
> public statement in order to try and ascertain all of the facts of the
> situation. We prefer not to make public 

Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Cloud Innovation Displays Very Poor, If Not Criminal, Netizenship

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Paschal,

Please explain why it’s a personal attack when no person was mentioned?

Please be enlightened that the topic under discussion is allowed because
its application of policy with implications.

FWIW, Cloud Innovation Ltd, rendering an apology does not make the problem
go away and the working group has to solve the real problem at hand

Let us be aware that, the way internet deals with bad netizens may cause
damage to parents and even to the whole region  if nothing is done to stop
it

--
Arnaud

Le lun. 25 mai 2020 à 11:30, Paschal Ochang  a écrit :

> This sounds like a personal attack in my opinion instead of a justified
> accusation. Why is this topic allowed to be discussed here when it’s rather
> irrelevant?. The parties involved have tendered formal apologies as
> reflected in their letters which is a sign of admittance and promotes the
> intent of good netizenship. It’s just irrelevant.
>
> On Monday, May 25, 2020, Arnaud AMELINA  wrote:
>
>> Hello, community
>>
>> +1 @Gregoire and @Mark Tinka
>>
>> *cloud innovation*  were allocated  *big bunch of IPv4* space as a *LIR*
>> with *no ASN*. Interesting, and no *v6*
>>
>> While the bylaws defines LIR as followed:
>> ++
>> Local Internet Registry (LIR):
>> any Network Operator that provides Internet services to distinct
>> end-users and end-sites
>> ++
>>
>> I wonder  which network does cloud innovation operate and which internet
>> services it provides to end-users and end-sites in *Africa*.
>>
>> How does this network *managing 3 x /11 of IPv4* *operate*?
>>
>> There is something here for the community to learn about.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> --
>> Arnaud
>>
>> Le sam. 23 mai 2020 à 14:20, Gregoire EHOUMI via RPD  a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Thanks Mark for exposing the details of the SEACOM AS37353 hijacking.
>>>
>>> I carefully read your report and also the Cloud Innovation Limited quick
>>> response including their attachments as justifications.
>>>
>>> I note that;
>>>
>>> ⁃ the service contract with Cloud Innovation covering the announcement
>>> of their prefixes by SEACOM AS37353 was terminated  by SEACOM.
>>>
>>> ⁃ some stale IRR route objects existed after termination of the contract.
>>>
>>> ⁃ through some multiple layer distribution an organisation in Manila
>>> Philippines was “delegated“ an IP block from Cloud Innovation address space.
>>>
>>> ⁃ both upstream ISP and the customer in Manila set up a BGP session
>>> using SEACOM's AS37353 as the ASN of the Manila customer.
>>>
>>> ⁃ there was a prompt reaction from the involved parties that included
>>> apologies to SEACOM and the wider internet community.
>>>
>>> ⁃ there were promises from said parties to be a better netizen which
>>> would mean, them not hijacking other networks ASN's.
>>>
>>> ⁃ there was clear refusal to disclose the details of the customer in
>>> Manila Philippines who hijacked the affected SEACOM ASN.
>>>
>>> All put together, demonstrates that what happened was an impersonation
>>> and not a BGP configuration error, nor an oversight in checking the right
>>> to use of the SEACOM ASN.
>>>
>>> 1. Why is it that the real customer did not bother presenting its
>>> apologies to the community
>>>
>>> 2. Why is there refusal to reveal customer’s details?
>>>
>>> 3. Why is it that the said prefix is no longer seen in the routing table
>>> originated by the genius ASN or any other ASN?
>>>
>>> 4. Which networks were involved and what happened to the end users?
>>>
>>> Can someone from AFRINIC explain what “delegation of IP block” mean?
>>>
>>> Note: The self organised Internet knows how to deal with bad net
>>> citizens.!
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Gregoire Ehoumi
>>>
>>>
>>>  Original message 
>>> From: Lu Heng 
>>> Date: 2020-05-09 5:43 a.m. (GMT-05:00)
>>> To: Mark Tinka 
>>> Cc: "r...@afrinic.net >> AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion List" <
>>> r...@afrinic.net>
>>> Subject: Re: [rpd] Cloud Innovation Displays Very Poor, If Not Criminal,
>>> Netizenship
>>>
>>> To whom it may concern,
>>>
>>> On May 8, Mark Think posted a claim to multiple lists that Cloud
>>> Innovation was abusing an ASN (37353) that didn’t belong to them (Cloud
>>> Innovat

Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Cloud Innovation Displays Very Poor, If Not Criminal, Netizenship

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hello, community

+1 @Gregoire and @Mark Tinka

*cloud innovation*  were allocated  *big bunch of IPv4* space as a *LIR*
with *no ASN*. Interesting, and no *v6*

While the bylaws defines LIR as followed:
++
Local Internet Registry (LIR):
any Network Operator that provides Internet services to distinct end-users
and end-sites
++

I wonder  which network does cloud innovation operate and which internet
services it provides to end-users and end-sites in *Africa*.

How does this network *managing 3 x /11 of IPv4* *operate*?

There is something here for the community to learn about.

Regards

--
Arnaud

Le sam. 23 mai 2020 à 14:20, Gregoire EHOUMI via RPD  a
écrit :

> Hello,
>
> Thanks Mark for exposing the details of the SEACOM AS37353 hijacking.
>
> I carefully read your report and also the Cloud Innovation Limited quick
> response including their attachments as justifications.
>
> I note that;
>
> ⁃ the service contract with Cloud Innovation covering the announcement of
> their prefixes by SEACOM AS37353 was terminated  by SEACOM.
>
> ⁃ some stale IRR route objects existed after termination of the contract.
>
> ⁃ through some multiple layer distribution an organisation in Manila
> Philippines was “delegated“ an IP block from Cloud Innovation address space.
>
> ⁃ both upstream ISP and the customer in Manila set up a BGP session using
> SEACOM's AS37353 as the ASN of the Manila customer.
>
> ⁃ there was a prompt reaction from the involved parties that included
> apologies to SEACOM and the wider internet community.
>
> ⁃ there were promises from said parties to be a better netizen which would
> mean, them not hijacking other networks ASN's.
>
> ⁃ there was clear refusal to disclose the details of the customer in
> Manila Philippines who hijacked the affected SEACOM ASN.
>
> All put together, demonstrates that what happened was an impersonation and
> not a BGP configuration error, nor an oversight in checking the right to
> use of the SEACOM ASN.
>
> 1. Why is it that the real customer did not bother presenting its
> apologies to the community
>
> 2. Why is there refusal to reveal customer’s details?
>
> 3. Why is it that the said prefix is no longer seen in the routing table
> originated by the genius ASN or any other ASN?
>
> 4. Which networks were involved and what happened to the end users?
>
> Can someone from AFRINIC explain what “delegation of IP block” mean?
>
> Note: The self organised Internet knows how to deal with bad net citizens.!
>
> Best regards
> Gregoire Ehoumi
>
>
>  Original message 
> From: Lu Heng 
> Date: 2020-05-09 5:43 a.m. (GMT-05:00)
> To: Mark Tinka 
> Cc: "r...@afrinic.net >> AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion List" <
> r...@afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Cloud Innovation Displays Very Poor, If Not Criminal,
> Netizenship
>
> To whom it may concern,
>
> On May 8, Mark Think posted a claim to multiple lists that Cloud
> Innovation was abusing an ASN (37353) that didn’t belong to them (Cloud
> Innovation) but rather belonged to Seacom through their acquisition of
> MacroLAN.
>
> While we regret this unfortunate incident, Mark’s claims that it was
> criminal or bad netizenship on the part of Cloud Innovation is without
> foundation and utterly incorrect.
>
> As shown below in the attached document from Paul Wollner(Ex-CTO of
> Macrolan who created IRR routes to allow Macrolan to announce Cloud
> Innovation's prefix); letter from Link Infinity International Ltd. (Link
> Infinity), A customer of Cloud Innovation; and attached LOA from LARUS
> authorizing IPDC Solutions to announce the prefix with origin AS134190.
> And a Letter from IPDC. This was an innocent mistake committed by third
> parties and had nothing to do with any action by Cloud Innovation or LARUS.
>
> Here’s what happened:
>
> Cloud Innovation delegated a /24 to Link Infinity, an ISP in December 2019.
>
>
> Link Infinity further delegated that same /24 to IPDC and asked Cloud
> innovation to issue an LOA, which we did. The LOA specifically required
> IPDC to use its own ASN to announce the space (AS134190).
>
> IPDC subsequently authorized one of its customers to use the said prefix.
>
>
> For reasons still unknown to Cloud Innovation, IPDC and their customer set
> up a BGP session wherein their customer used AS37353 as the origin to
> advertise prefix 156.241.3.0/24.
>
>
> Upon discovering the announcement, rather than contact Cloud Innovation,
> Mark contacted IPDC who provided him with an incomplete explanation blaming
> their customer and Mark, not realizing that Cloud Innovation was not the
> customer in question posted far and wide about the event. It is unclear to
> us why he chose to do this rather than contact us to try and resolve the
> issue.
>
>
> A contributing factor to the erroneous BGP configuration by IPDC's
> customer may have been data contained in some outdated IRR route objects
> for 156.241.0.0/16 which have subsequently been deleted.
>
> As soon as we became aware of the 

Re: [Community-Discuss] Proposition d’inscrire un point sur le multilinguisme dans les Statuts d'AFRINIC

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hello Sunday,

We could, based on tools, allow everyone to post and write official
documents including policy proposals in their preferred  language. Could
easily become chaotic

Afrinic has been communicating in Arabic, English and French  and it is
worth supporting these efforts  toward a full and complete communication
and documentation in these languages.

Lacnic  does  communicate  in multiple languages
 https://politicas.lacnic.net/politicas/list

Let us concretize  this  minimum of the expression of our diversity which
promotes more inclusion.

--
Arnaud

Le ven. 6 mars 2020 à 06:11, Sunday Folayan  a écrit :

> Babban 'yan Afirka,
>
> Idan da gaske muna buƙatar isa ga mafi yawan usingan Afirka ta amfani da
> Harsuna, to muna buƙatar komawa zuwa manyan manyan yarukan da ake magana da
> Afirka, kuma sakamakon zai zama mai ban sha'awa. Harsuna kamar Swahili da
> Hausa za su fito, ba masu yin yanzu ba.
>
> Sa'ar al'amarin shine, akwai kayan aikin fassara masu amfani yanzu, kuma
> na tabbata kunyi amfani da daya don karanta wannan sakon. Ya kamata mu mai
> da hankali ga haɓaka kayan aiki masu amfani da hankali, maimakon ƙananan
> yakarmu waɗanda ba sa ƙaruwa da ilimi.
>
> Mai da hankali kan ayyukan AfriNIC da Yaren ma'aikata, kuma African Afirka
> na gaba za su yaba da ƙoƙarin da kuke yi. Wannan ita ce hanya.
>
> Barka da safe
>
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 8:14 PM Etienne TSHISHIMBI  wrote:
>
>> Bonsoir Kossi et à tous,
>>
>> Voici ce que je disais " Nous désirons parvenir à faire la promotion
>> d'un multilinguisme effectif dans toutes les procédures, dans tous les
>> processus et dans tous les documents d’AFRINIC."
>>
>> Toi tu dis :
>>
>> Je pense que nous devons simplement demander à Afrinic de veiller à la
>> traduction de tous les documents à soumettre à la communauté dans les
>> langues officielles de l'Union Africaine avant de les rendre public; cela
>> évitera la suprématie d'une langue sur les autres.
>>
>> Et moi j'ai dit :
>>
>> AFRINIC doit favoriser une multipolarité linguistique construite autour
>> de quelques grandes langues de communication continentale
>>
>> Je ne vois pas de contradiction. Toi tu l'appelles langues officielles de
>> l'Union Africaine et moi "quelques grandes langues de communication
>> continentale."
>>
>> Dans le soucis que notre écosystème numérique reflète notre diversité
>> culturelle et linguistique, nous faisons cet appel à AFRINIC.
>>
>> Le jeu. 5 mars 2020 à 14:34, Kossi Amessinou 
>> a écrit :
>>
>>> Bonsoir Etienne et à tous,
>>> Nous avons besoin de faire des choix et d'avancer dans l'écosystème de
>>> l'internet. Le défi de la traduction des contenus est présent dans tous les
>>> débats au niveau global. Je pense que nous devons simplement demander à
>>> Afrinic de veiller à la traduction de tous les documents à soumettre à la
>>> communauté dans les langues officielles de l'Union Africaine avant de les
>>> rendre public; cela évitera la suprématie d'une langue sur les autres. Dans
>>> les activités en ligne, les rencontres doivent continuer à se faire par
>>> groupe linguistique au bénéfice de tous. Nous n'aurons jamais une langue
>>> mondiale pour des raisons géostratégiques et politiques. Nous sommes riches
>>> de notre diversité dans l'écosystème global du numérique en Afrique. Quand
>>> on finira par obtenir la présence des langues officielles des pays sur la
>>> toile avec des contenus hébergés en Afrique, nous pourrons ensuite penser à
>>> la présence des langues locales africaines en ligne, du moins en version
>>> audiovisuel. Cordialement.
>>>
>>> Le jeu. 5 mars 2020 à 13:31, Etienne TSHISHIMBI  a
>>> écrit :
>>>
 Bonsoir à tous,


 La façon de faire d’AFRINIC nous inciter à réfléchir, à agir et à
 réagir. Je voudrai dire qu'on ne peut prendre le train de la modernité et
 du progrès qu'en faisant allégeance à une langue dominante. Si AFRINIC
 continue ainsi, elle peut porter atteinte à la diversité linguistique, et
 menacer la diversité culturelle et conceptuelle de notre continent. Il faut
 prendre la mesure du rôle stratégique des langues, de la diversité
 linguistique, de la diversité culturelle. Nous refusons la ségrégation
 linguistique et le darwinisme culturel. Cependant, nous ne voulons pas
 mettre les langues en concurrence ou en compétition. Nous désirons parvenir
 à faire la promotion d'un multilinguisme effectif dans toutes les
 procédures, dans tous les processus et dans tous les documents d’AFRINIC.
 L’écosystème numérique africain ne peut-être un endroit de standardisation
 culturelle.  AFRINIC doit favoriser une multipolarité linguistique
 construite autour de quelques grandes langues de communication 
 continentale. AFRINIC
 a vocation à permettre à nos langues d’être des courroies de transmission
 des connaissances et de production d'outils de référence, des langues de la
 société de l'information, des langues d'information, des langues de
 

Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC legacy space ownership manipulation

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hello,

Allow me to offer a different view.

Because we all want role separation which is normal and must be framed by
the company’s constitution, we must agree  that the issue on the table is a
matter for board. (Allegations  of malicious actions on to the public
resources  which the organization is responsible for on behalf of the
global internet community)

Let us focus more on the message than on the carrier which could have been
the CEO, legal, communication department.

Separation of roles also encompasses that each party accept and respect the
role and responsibilities of others.

May be when the organization solves its complex governance issues being
addressed and occupying all our attention, board can go  back to routine
work and ceo and staff will engage on the operations and we will enjoy
again working and interacting with them.

It is curious to see that some former board members who were keen in
violating the rules of separation of roles and always invoking company act,
board fiduciary responsibilities are now asking for the separation...

We’ve won something... let’s make it continue.

--
Arnaud

Le mar. 5 nov. 2019 à 07:01, Mark Tinka  a écrit :

> Don't know if it's just me, but curious why this update (and the
> investigations associated with it) are not coming from our CEO.
>
> I've consistently said that I feel the AFRINIC Board are too involved in
> AFRINIC's day-to-day affairs, which, IMHO, need to be managed by the
> AFRINIC CEO and his team, both in front of and behind the scenes.
>
> I am somewhat disturbed that this culture does not appear to have changed
> even on the back of the appointment of the new CEO.
>
> Personally, I'd rather be hearing from the CEO and/or any of his staff,
> than the Board.
>
> Mark.
>
> On 4/Nov/19 22:45, Bope Domilongo Christian wrote:
>
> Dear Community at large,
>
> As the community may also, be aware, AFRINIC has attracted some media
> coverage relating to suspicious activity in its WHOIS database primarily a
> limited section of legacy resources.
>
> On behalf of the Board, I would like to assure both the AFRINIC membership
> and the Internet community at large that the Board has conducted some
> preliminary assessment of the matter, and would like to let you know that
> investigations are progressing well and will be concluded soon, most likely
> before or by the end of the year. We cannot reveal much or go into further
> details at this stage as we do not want to jeopardise the investigations.
> However, you can rest assured that we will get to the bottom of the matter.
> At the same time, we want to ensure that the rights of any affected parties
> are respected and protected as per the law. All said we are keen to ensure
> the interests of AFRINIC members are safeguarded as we seek to maintain
> stable, reliable and effective management of Internet resources. Besides,
> the AFRINIC WHOIS database remains fully operational with high standards of
> integrity.
>
> Nevertheless, there is always room for improvement and AFRINIC operations
> team is currently reviewing some of the long-established processes relating
> to the management of Internet resources under AFRINIC's ambit. The team
> is already implementing some improvement measures at both the
> IT Infrastructure and process level. As usual, the AFRINIC membership will
> be appropriately apprised of the developments.
>
> Best regards,
> Dr Christian D. Bope
> Chairman, AFRINIC Board of Directors
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Lobbying Allegations against Wafa Dahmani

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi, community and PWG members

I noticed that lobbying for votes for afrinic BoD is being used to divert
attention  from serious issue raised by WAFA.  Enough has been said, but  I
wonder if I should condemn  Dewole, Afrinic pdp  cochair,  campaign  for
board candidates, using national NOG  list and turning AFRINIC board
election  to nationalism. (*l)
let be serious, show maturity and address real issues.


(*) http://abuja.forum.org.ng/pipermail/ngnog-discuss/2019-June/005259.html

Arnaud

On Thu, Jul 4, 2019, 07:30 Andrew Alston 
wrote:

> Badru,
>
> Yet again – you have not read my emails.
>
> *I fully the support the right to lobby in public forms*
>
> *I fully support the right of any individual to have their say*
>
> *I fully support the right of any member to change the rules using due
> process as defined*
>
> I have said this, over and over again.  I have also been very blunt about
> the fact that yes, I have lobbied, and I make no apology for that because I
> believe that the right to lobby in the pursuit of ones goals, and I believe
> that essentially, elections are political processes and democratic in
> nature, and democracy doesn’t work without that aspect of it.
>
> However, what I fundamentally disagree with – is misrepresentation of who
> we represent – something I have never done – and I fundamentally disagree
> with people who are in a directly conflicted position taking a stand which
> deepens that conflict, especially when the neutrality directly relates to
> things that affect this community.
>
> I will quote from one of the emails I sent – which was to an email list
> containing many members:
>
> I will quote from two separate emails that I have sent over the years to
> lobby in previous elections – these were sent to email lists that were not
> AfriNIC – they were not sent to individuals unsolicited – and there are
> many on this list who can attest to the accuracy of these emails.
>
> *Email 1:*
>
> *I am not going to tell any of you how to vote – What I tell you above is
> my perspective, and yes, its biased towards what I have seen and how well I
> know the candidates.  What I will say however, is that it is absolutely
> critical that the South African members get online and vote – or show up at
> the meeting and vote – or send proxies – whichever – but have your voice
> heard.  As we move into a time when v4 is running out (AfriNIC is into its
> final /8), and when we move into an environment where so much is changing
> with that runout – and particularly when we have managed to turn an
> organization around – we need to ensure that we have strong candidates that
> represent the community and can keep the organization alive.  Because
> without AfriNIC – without a registry – we end up in trouble – and no one
> really wants the alternative scenarios.*
>
> *So what I will ask is, look at the candidates, consider them not from a
> geo-political perspective, not from a linguistic perspective, but consider
> them on the merits and what they have achieved – and then vote as you
> feel.  Their CV’s are all online.*
>
> *Email 2:*
>
> *As such, for those of you who are opting to issue proxies and wish to
> issue proxies to myself or via myself, this is how I will be voting.  Those
> of you who are voting electronically, I encourage you when the slate comes
> out to study each and every candidate – but I am confident that what I have
> said above will ring true, and I ask every member of this list to get out
> there and use your vote, either for one of these candidates or otherwise
> one of the others when the slate comes out – but please, make sure you
> vote, either via proxy or via online or in person.  I cannot stress how
> many critical issues are going to come up in the next year or two, and
> without a strong and independent board we could face serious issues.*
>
> Both emails quote above are a matter of record for the world to see – and
> here is the major difference – a.) No where do I misrepresent who I am
> speaking for b.) I explicitly state – these are MY views, accept them or
> reject them, but – please vote – because its important to have your voice
> heard.  Had Wafa sent an email saying “Hi, I’m Wafa, and these are my
> specific views on each candidate, and this is why I will be voting the way
> that I am, and if you like these choices, feel free to vote with me, but if
> you don’t, still have your say in the way you see fit”, I would be here,
> backing her to the hilt – however, what I saw was a.) a misrepresentation
> by implication of who was represented and b.) a blatant display lacking of
> neutrality from the chair of the appeals committee – particularly in light
> of the PDP and the position of co-chair – and I believe that brings the
> integrity and neutrality of said appeals committee into question when it is
> critical that trust in that committee remains high, which is why I agree
> with Sander when he called for her to step down to maintain the integrity
> of 

Re: [Community-Discuss] Afrinic Services DOWN

[Arnaud AMELINA]

You're right Marcus, +1

 it’s ceo responsibility, not the BOARD, and why are community members
trying to micro manage board?

Regards

Arnaud

Le sam. 1 juin 2019 à 13:33, Marcus K. G. Adomey  a
écrit :

> Hello,
>
> Oh yes, business continuity and disaster recovery ... I would have queried
> CEO and management before I escalate to board.
>
> Cedric report to CEO and not to Board.
>
> Are we calling for Board to micro manage the CEO and complain later?
>
> Why are you trying to micro manage the Board through what we are seeing
> these days?
>
>
> Marcus
> --
> *From:* francis asiboh via Community-Discuss <
> community-discuss@afrinic.net>
> *Sent:* Friday, May 31, 2019 4:46:04 PM
> *To:* community-discuss@afrinic.net
> *Subject:* [Community-Discuss] Afrinic Services DOWN
>
> Dear board members and all members of the community
>
> All Afrinic services (Whois, RPKI, Afrinic.net, etc..) were down yesterday
> the 30th of May 2019 for a very long time. Board, where is the Disaster
> Recovery Strategy in this particular kind of incident ?
>
> Since now, no Root Cause Analysis were sent for transparency to the
> community.
>
> I am surprised that the Infrastructure Unit Manager, Mr Cedric MBEYET
> turned a deaf ear and did not learnt his lesson from the last incident
> where RPKI services were down.
>
> Instead of taking care of Afrinic services, the current board of directors
> is busy hiding public document from its members.
>
> Regards
> Francis ASIBOH
> Network Engineer
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC 2019 AGMM quorum

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Bonjour M. Badru, +1.

On dit chez nous : "il n'y a pas de plus aveugle, que celui qui ne veut pas
voir". Et M. Alston et ses Acolytes semblent être dans cet état de fait.
Donc je pense qu'il ne nous servira à rien de leur faire entendre raison,
car ils n'en veulent pas, ils ont leur façon de voir, qu'ils veulent
imposer à tous et comme ce sont eux qui savent crier plus que tout le
monde, laissons-les continuer à crier, bon courage à eux.

Chers membres de la communauté vous comprendrez que ces messieurs-là ont un
plan, qui semble se dessiner, détruire AFRINIC par tous les moyens. Mais
ils n'y arriveront pas. Nos ancêtres veillent aux grains.

Cordialement.

Arnaud.

Le ven. 22 févr. 2019 à 13:39, Badru Ntege  a
écrit :

> @Andrew
>
>
>
> Let me ask a simple question
>
>
>
> Have you failed to access the public document from the Mauritian courts ??
>
>
>
> I would suggest since the reference has been given its easier for you to
> access the documents less they share it here and you still think that they
> might have doctored it since you have been very clear and public that you
> do not trust anything they do.
>
>
>
> I actually think it’s more transparent for Afrinic to refer members to a
> public document than try to share it here.
>
>
>
> We should all be working to positively impact our organization as opposed
> to breaking it down at every opportunity we get.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> BN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Andrew Alston 
> *Date: *Thursday, February 21, 2019 at 3:57 PM
> *To: *Dabu Sifiso , Sander Steffann <
> san...@steffann.nl>
> *Cc: *General Discussions of AFRINIC 
> *Subject: *Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC 2019 AGMM quorum
>
>
>
> SC/COM/MOT/01411/2018
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Sami's status as a co-chair

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Andrew,

Why do you always react following your ego and  pursuing personal interest
and not community interest?  When you started this palaver on last call and
Sami tenure, you tried on community-discuss to use data you have not cross
checked to discredit  the organization  performance. What is your real
motive? Is this what we should expect from Liquid telecom all along ?

Arnaud

Le mer. 5 déc. 2018 20:10, Andrew Alston 
a écrit :

> Komi,
>
>
>
> You cannot rewrite the mandate granted by the community in the minutes.
>
>
>
> Fact – the reality is – the community voted – clearly – on a 6 month
> mandate – that is indisputable fact.
>
> Fact – that mandate expired
>
>
>
> What the **minutes** say does not change the reality of a video recorded
> meeting.
>
>
>
> When the issue was raised – is immaterial – the context of the issue being
> raised – is immaterial – fact – is fact – the mandate was granted – the
> mandate expired.
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Komi Elitcha 
> *Date: *Wednesday, 5 December 2018 at 21:30
> *To: *Andrew Alston 
> *Cc: *"AfriNIC RPD MList." 
> *Subject: *Re: [rpd] Sami's status as a co-chair
>
>
>
> Hello Andrew,
>
>
>
> The minutes(*) of the PPM  of AFRINIC-28 was published by co-chairs as
> mandated by the PDP.
>
>
>
> The cochair election sections (6.1) read:
>
>
>
> []
>
>
>
> "The Elections Committee asked for a show of hands for those in favor, and
> those not in favor of Mark Elkins’ candidature. After a show of hands,
> there were 22 in favor and 56 not in favor of Mark’s candidature.
>
> NomCom Chair called for nominations from the floor to fill the empty PDWG
> co-chair seat.
>
> There were suggestions that the position be filled by a temporary co-chair
> until there’s another nominations process to find a replacement co-chair.
>
> Sami Salih (the outgoing co-chair) offered to continue as co-chair till
> there is a process in future to find a new co-chair.
>
> Delegates were asked if there is support for Sami to continue as co-chair
> till the next scheduled nominations period. There was strong support to
> have Sami continue – and he was therefore tasked to serve as temporary
> co-chair until the next scheduled nominations season."
>
>
>
> Practices at AFRINIC is that Elections are held  mostly during the
> community meeting coupled with AGMM. So it is not surprising to see that
> the PDWG admin page(**) lists Sami as cochair with term June2016 -
> June2019.
>
>
>
> This probably explains why an election process was not triggered for the
> AFRINIC-29.
>
>
>
> Nobody raised an alarm when the 77 days before election day passed (15
> September 2018) and there was no nomination process.Furthermore, at the
> beginning of the PPM in Hammamet, there was no objection to Sami chairing
> the meeting.
>
>
>
> Making all these noises, and challenging Sami right to operate at the
> meeting and moving on, just because Co-chairs made a decision one does not
> like is not responsible.
>
>
>
> Decency would have required the separation of issues  appropriately
> handling them through other mechanisms, which would  normally be more
> consensual with interest in conflict resolution an in an appealing manner .
>
>
>
>
>
> Hope this helps
>
>
>
>
>
> -Komi
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> (*)
> https://www.afrinic.net/policy/development-working-group/ppm-afrinic-28
>
> (**)https://www.afrinic.net/policy/development-working-group#admin
>
>
>
> Le mar. 4 déc. 2018 à 4:52 PM, Andrew Alston <
> andrew.als...@liquidtelecom.com> a écrit :
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> I want to clarify something – to be very sure.
>
>
>
> If I am correct – there was no election of a PDP co-chair in Tunisia.  Can
> someone please confirm that?  Because if there was no election – we only
> have ONE chair at the moment – and Sami’s status as a co-chair has lapsed
> and he cannot adjudicate on consensus.
>
>
>
> I say this – because in Dakar – and for those of you that were not there,
> please see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWTApl4QHfY at about 13
> minutes in, Sami’s position was granted as interim only – and only for the
> following 6 months until the next PDP.
>
>
>
> So – unless there was an election called – and video evidence of this –
> Sami is no longer eligible to act in the position of co-chair – since his
> mandate was not granted by this community on the floor of a meeting, and as
> per the legal counsel at the Dakar meeting – any position into which Sami
> entered – was only valid until the November meeting, and the co-chair goes
> on, on record on the microphone to further state that Sami was only
> appointed “Until the next PDP meeting”
>
>
>
> Sami – on that note, thank you for your service as the interim co-chair
> over the preceeding 6 months.
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
> ___
> RPD mailing list
> r...@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
> ___
> RPD mailing list
> r...@afrinic.net
> 

Re: [Community-Discuss] Exchange with the Competition Commission of Mauritius

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Thanks Alan, i thought this was obvious and am i surprised that we spent
such effort to clarify.  Proponents of this issue are supposed to know the
remit of Afrinic activities and how they could be regulated if need be.

Regards

Arnaud

Le mar. 11 sept. 2018 à 07:13, Alan Barrett  a
écrit :

> Dear AFRINIC members and community,
>
> I am now able to report on the investigation into competition issues that
> was started last year.
>
> AFRINIC informally approached the Competition Commission of Mauritius
> (CCM) in November 2017 with an inquiry about potential competition issues.
> In particular, we asked whether the absence of a policy for inter-regional
> transfer of IP address space (between AFRINIC members and members of other
> RIRs) was likely to be considered a violation of the Competition Act.
>
> The Competition Commission is not mandated to give advice upon request.
> As per the Commission’s standard screening procedures, an internal
> assessment was conducted to review the submissions of AFRINIC.  The
> internal review was not shared with AFRINIC since no formal complaint had
> been lodged.  Upon request from AFRINIC, an outline of the legal and
> analytical framework which could apply to the submissions was shared over
> an informal meeting in June 2018.
>
> Without prejudice to the Competition Commission, it was agreed that
> AFRINIC could report the following:
>
> In the event that a formal complaint were to be filed with the CCM,
> averring that economic activities within, or having an effect within
> Mauritius were affected by the alleged lack of a policy for inter- regional
> transfer of IP address space, the Executive Director could decide to
> enquire into the matter. Amongst other legal thresholds, the Executive
> Director would need to form a view on whether or not AFRINIC is an
> “enterprise” under section 2 of the Competition Act 2007, and whether
> AFRINIC’s fees are so high as to be considered excessive.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alan Barrett
> CEO, AFRINIC
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Cotonou - CELEBRATION AFRICA IG 1998-2018

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi Marcus, here a very good and big observation. I were there and  it was
great and emotional.

Congratulations to pioneers, God bless them for the great work they done.

Regards

Arnaud

Le jeu. 19 juil. 2018 à 19:34, Marcus K. G. Adomey  a
écrit :

> Dear Community,
>
> On July 6, 2018, I took part in the celebration of twentieth anniversary
> of Africa Internet Group. During this celebration, the pioneers of the
> African Internet were celebrated, the lessons learnt, and way forward were
> discussed.
>
> As expected AFRINIC was distinguished as main achievement from Cotonou'98.
>
> The event that touched me the most was when the past immediate CEO of
> AfriNIC, Mr. Adiel Akplogan, who happened to be the first CEO of AfriNIC,
> was given his special award for his tremendous work done to operationalize
> AfriNIC. To this effect and together, let us congratulate the pioneers of
> the Internet in Africa.
>
> Impressive speakers and sponsorshttp://internethistory.africa/en/
>
> God Bless them!!! God Bless Africa!!!
>
>
> Marcus
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Are we afraid of election?

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Yeah! Hum! A very big question, Gregoire.

Arnaud



Le ven. 20 juil. 2018 à 20:25, Grégoire EHOUMI via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss@afrinic.net> a écrit :

> Hello,
>
> I am sure board is working to appoint people to fill the vacant seats.
> From the candidates list, i can see that there are more candidates than for
> the elections which took place during the last AGMM.
>
> So the question which came to mind is : Are people afraid of Election or
> NomCOM failure to convince them to apply, or are we dealing with candidates
> who did not pass NomCom selection trying a second chance?
>
>
> https://www.afrinic.net/bod183
>
> Gregoire
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Raising concerns

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Andrew,

Le mer. 27 juin 2018 02:42, Andrew Alston 
a écrit :

> Arnaud,
>
> To be frank - there are many lists that Afrinic is discussed on - NAP is
> one of them - because it contains a few hundred afrinic members - but it is
> not an “afrinic discussion list” in any way shape or form - it is an
> internet exchange list for members of a particular exchange - just happens
> that sometimes Afrinic matters come up there.
>
> Quite frankly - I see it on many lists - people would rather discuss on
> other lists where they are not confronted with the vitriol and accusations
> and at times even blatant racism that occurs on this list - and they are
> free to do so.
>
> This list is not exactly the most... welcoming to people who come here -
> the moment anyone posts a disagreement it gets personal and is full of ad
> hominem attacks and personalization, so, if we don’t want segments of this
> community taking their issues off list - then this list needs to be a lot
> less hostile.
>


I know there are many lists where things are discussed including Afrinic
matters, but my point was  CEO committing for actions from topic discussed
out of afrinic  official discussion fora. Is CEO doing same on all lists ?

And thanks for raising issues with what have been happening on lists:
Participants behaviors and discussions  tempo, personal attacks, etc...

It is obvious that  you play a big role in the disorders  and  disfunction
affecting all Afrinic public lists, chasing people away,  affecting the
community  reputation. The solution can not be in  sub- communities and
parallel  lists.
I expect a better behavior from someone working for a respectable African
 operator and who has served on the Afrinic BoD.

"Be the change you want to see" ?



> And yes - I still oppose the review policy - because I still believe that
> the RSA covers what it needs to - and we do not need anything more - nor do
> I see a point in anything more.  Especially something as what I still
> believe is wide open to attack.
>
> The specifics of the case I referred to in your quoted email were about
> someone who was openly and publically spamming people with an offer in
> contravention of adopter policy and hence the RSA - we don’t need the
> review policy to deal with such
>


If we were to follow  you, this community would not have adopted the "lame
delegation " proposal, which is a review.
RSA does not describe  how review and investigation  should be conducted,
nor does the current  allocation policies. ..
Time is coming for this community to adopt what your colleague called
"sensible  policies". It is the mandatory way  to the Afrinic future.

Arnaud



> Liquid Telecommunications - Group Head Of IP Strategy
> --
> *From:* Arnaud AMELINA 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 26, 2018 9:01:45 PM
> *To:* Andrew Alston
> *Cc:* Alan Barrett; community-discuss@afrinic.net
> *Subject:* Re: [Community-Discuss] Raising concerns
>
> Dear Community,
>
> 2018-06-22 8:45 GMT+00:00 Andrew Alston :
>
>> Alan,
>>
>> Sorry to say this - but - these questions - need to be asked and answered
>> in front of the community - this community has a right to the answers.
>>
>> Since you asked me for succinct questions though - I will ask them
>> straight
>>
>> a.) What is the board doing about the fact that the organisation cannot -
>> by the bylaws - elect directors - and without elected directors cannot get
>> quorum to host another AGMM - which is a 
>> i.) When will we be getting a response to the outcome of the
>> investigation promised to myself and the members of the NAP list as regards
>> a particular sale of IP space
>>
>
>
> H. Since when did the NAP list became a forum to discuss AFRINIC
> matters that the CEO commits to?  A special list for a certain community?
> Double standards?
>
> Is he asking for investigation on allocated address space while he is
> strongly opposed to the review policy proposal?
>
> As discussed over and over, we are reaching a stage where review of
> resources usage and investigation when required has become critical to
> AFRINIC operation
>
>
>
>>
>> I can keep going - but I think that is sufficient for now.
>>
>> Alan - if asking questions is attacking people - then there is a problem
>> - because if questions are asked by the members and there are no problems
>> with the answers - there is nothing to feel attacked about.  If however -
>> you are saying that members must ask their  questions in the dark and out
>> of sight of this community - you are again asking me to stay away from the
>> precepts of transparency - and I cannot - and will not - do that.
>>

Re: [Community-Discuss] Raising concerns

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Dear CEO,

I'm very worried, It's unfortunate that a CEO waits for complaints from his
staff before rebuking someone who is degrading the image of his institution
(AFRINIC). This is not what is expected of a CEO who knows how to do his
job, because he should have on his own noted the degrading remarks that
some people hold on AFRINIC, and made the necessary arrangements to caution
them about it, in a timely manner.

When it start affecting staff, the damage may be big and irreversible.

Arnaud.

2018-06-22 8:28 GMT+00:00 Alan Barrett :

> Dear Andrew,
>
> You may have some legitimate questions or concerns, but the way you are
> raising them is extremely destructive to staff morale.  Staff watch this
> mailing list and see the organisation being attacked, or their team being
> attacked.  Also, I can’t reasonably extract questions from the deluge of
> many email messages per day.
>
> Please use a more appropriate channel for raising concerns.  Here are some
> options:
>
> * When a ticket is closed, the person who opened the ticket is sent a link
> to a satisfaction survey.
>
> * When you are dissatisfied with service, you can send a message to
> .
>
> * If you have questions or concerns that you would like the CEO to deal
> with, please send them to .
>
> * If you have questions or concerns that you would like the Board to deal
> with, please send them to 
>
> Alan Barrett
> CEO, AFRINIC
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Faulty result for Western Africa in AfriNIC AGMM Elections

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Mark

Le mer. 30 mai 2018 18:14, Mark Elkins  a écrit :

>
> What would the point of that be then - or are people confusing "None of
> the above" with "Abstain" ?
>

It could  mean "abstain", "dislike the election" "none of the proposed
candidates suits me", etc...
 It is very important to explicitly  define what it means and how does it
affect the election validation and the results.

Arnaud

>
>
>
>
>
>> Hopefully additional clarity can be achieved prior to the next election
>> and we won’t have to face this issue again. Personally, I like the idea of
>> having “none of the above” as an option in all cases.
>>
>
> Clarity and fairness is the outcome of the complaint regarding seat 2 here
> imho; for the rest we can agree to disagree.
>
>
>
>>
>> Owen
>>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>>
>> On May 29, 2018, at 14:56 , Arnaud AMELINA  wrote:
>>
>> Dear Ashok as a lawyer you know that there is the law and spirit of the
>> law, please read bellow
>>
>> 2018-05-25 11:18 GMT+00:00 Ashok :
>>
>>> Dear All,
>>> I apologize for having  missed your rejoinder to my mail.
>>>
>>
>> Despite the delays, we appreciate your response as the matter is of great
>> concern.
>>
>>
>>> Your first question regards the reason as to why the same principle has
>>> been applied to the election for Seat 2
>>> notwithstanding the fact that there were two candidates.
>>> My response is that an election cannot be run on different principles.
>>> In this particular election the option "none of the above " was
>>> introduced for the first time and everyone was aware of this and it
>>> applied to all the elections held on that day. The Election guidelines were
>>> amended to acomodate this option.
>>>
>>
>> Yes indeed and the elections guidelines explicitely addressed the case of
>> only a single candidate running for election and the option " none of the
>> above" in this case got more votes than the sole candidate but is very
>> silent in the case of multiple candidates running for elections with the
>> option "none of the above" getting more votes.
>>
>> Anytime elections involve the option "none of the above", there are
>> always clear rules on how the results are interpreted and the actions that
>> must be taken when the option "none of the above" get more votes than the
>> multiple candidates.
>>
>> It's not my intention to teach you something here, but it does look very
>> bizarre that the legal counsel never bothered to help the board to make
>>  the guidelines unambiguous  and conform to members expectations.
>>
>>
>>> Consequently this option has to be taken in consideration when
>>> finalising the results.
>>> Where there were two candidates. The options for voters were (1) yes for
>>> candidate (1)-((2) yes for candidate 2-(3) yes for non of the above.Each
>>> one is mutually exclusive.
>>> Each score to be counted separately. The majority for either option wins
>>> the day.
>>>
>>
>> Following  your reasoning above and the guidelines which say the
>> candidate with the highest votes win, the members and community should then
>> accept "none of the above" as the elected candidate and seated although
>> "none of the above " did not go through Nomcom and was not listed on the
>> candidates slates  published by Nomcom.
>>
>> Which means seat 2 should not be declared vacant to be filled by board.
>>
>> Filling  seat 2 by board would constitute the violation of "none  of the
>> above" rights and of our rules and thus expose us to legal litigation.
>>
>>
>>
>>> One should not create a fictitious majority by adding votes polled by
>>> (1) & (2) together. The real majority was to all intents and purposes the
>>> option which polled the most votes. There is no need to extrapolate or
>>> interpret.
>>>
>>
>> There is No fictitious majority being created. It was just an example of
>> how this case could have been interpreted just like you do have your own
>> interpretation.
>>
>> In many cases,  abstention is compared to voters in order to decide how
>> to proceed with  validating an election and counting results..
>>
>>
>>
>>> Where there was one candidate there were two options- Yes for the single
>>> candidate or yes for  "non of the above"
>>&g

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Faulty result for Western Africa in AfriNIC AGMM Elections

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Owen,

2018-05-29 22:34 GMT+00:00 Owen DeLong :

> Arnaud,
>
> While I agree that additional clarity is needed and I agree that there is
> some validity to the claim that none of the above MAY not have been a
> legitimate choice to place on the ballot, I think we cannot go changing the
> rules of the election and violating the expectations of the voters,
> membership, and community after the election has run.
>

Voters, membership and community are saying: <>


>
> Nobody raised an objection to the presence of none of the above on the
> ballot for seat 2 prior to or during the election.
>

No one is raising objection even now on  this option being on the ballot as
the guidelines are clear on that. the issue at hand is the correct
implementation  of the guidelines as written.


>
> Since there were more than enough voters who selected none of the above to
> change the result among the remaining two candidates, it is not legitimate
> to simply discard the none of the above votes and declare one of those
> candidates a winner. Indeed, I would argue that is the worst possible
> choice among all other options.
>
> The other options as I see it are:
>
> 1. Allow the board to treat the seat as vacant and appoint a board member
> until the
> next AGMM.
>
> 2. Treat none of the above as a valid election result (in which case it
> should be
> considered the same for all 3 seats) and preclude the board from appointing
> anyone to the seat(s) until an election can be run.
>
>
> 3. Treat none of the above as a valid election result only for seat 2 and
> preclude
> the board from appointing seat 2 while still allowing them to appoint
> seats 5
> and 6.
>
> As I see it, the best option is option 1. It allows the organization to
> proceed with a full board until the next AGMM where a hopefully more
> effective election can be accomplished.
>
> I think option 2 is bad because it leaves the board precariously
> short-handed with only 5 of the expected 8 members, including the CEO. (The
> 3 elected members which remain, whoever is appointed to fill Haitham’s
> vacancy, and the CEO).
>
> The problem I have with option 3 is I have trouble justifying treating the
> election of “none of the above” differently in this circumstance than in
> the case of a single unopposed candidate. In both cases, more voters felt
> that they didn’t want any of the options on the ballot and voted not to
> elect any fo the candidates. The outcome is, IMHO, the same regardless of
> the number of candidates and should be handled identically.
>

Why? There are places in the world where "none of the above" is on ballot
and has not effect on the results
and candidates with the highest votes wins. It is matter of the elections
rules. In the current  situation,  the guidelines are clear  and explicit
 on how we should  handle the results. So let follow it and engage on
discussions  for amending the rules  if we see need to do so.


>
> Hopefully additional clarity can be achieved prior to the next election
> and we won’t have to face this issue again. Personally, I like the idea of
> having “none of the above” as an option in all cases.
>

Clarity and fairness is the outcome of the complaint regarding seat 2 here
imho; for the rest we can agree to disagree.


>
> Owen
>

Thanks


>
> On May 29, 2018, at 14:56 , Arnaud AMELINA  wrote:
>
> Dear Ashok as a lawyer you know that there is the law and spirit of the
> law, please read bellow
>
> 2018-05-25 11:18 GMT+00:00 Ashok :
>
>> Dear All,
>> I apologize for having  missed your rejoinder to my mail.
>>
>
> Despite the delays, we appreciate your response as the matter is of great
> concern.
>
>
>> Your first question regards the reason as to why the same principle has
>> been applied to the election for Seat 2
>> notwithstanding the fact that there were two candidates.
>> My response is that an election cannot be run on different principles. In
>> this particular election the option "none of the above " was
>> introduced for the first time and everyone was aware of this and it
>> applied to all the elections held on that day. The Election guidelines were
>> amended to acomodate this option.
>>
>
> Yes indeed and the elections guidelines explicitely addressed the case of
> only a single candidate running for election and the option " none of the
> above" in this case got more votes than the sole candidate but is very
> silent in the case of multiple candidates running for elections with the
> option "none of the above" getting more votes.
>
> Anytime elections involve the option "none of the above", there are always
> clear r

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Faulty result for Western Africa in AfriNIC AGMM Elections

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Dear Ashok as a lawyer you know that there is the law and spirit of the
law, please read bellow

2018-05-25 11:18 GMT+00:00 Ashok :

> Dear All,
> I apologize for having  missed your rejoinder to my mail.
>

Despite the delays, we appreciate your response as the matter is of great
concern.


> Your first question regards the reason as to why the same principle has
> been applied to the election for Seat 2
> notwithstanding the fact that there were two candidates.
> My response is that an election cannot be run on different principles. In
> this particular election the option "none of the above " was
> introduced for the first time and everyone was aware of this and it
> applied to all the elections held on that day. The Election guidelines were
> amended to acomodate this option.
>

Yes indeed and the elections guidelines explicitely addressed the case of
only a single candidate running for election and the option " none of the
above" in this case got more votes than the sole candidate but is very
silent in the case of multiple candidates running for elections with the
option "none of the above" getting more votes.

Anytime elections involve the option "none of the above", there are always
clear rules on how the results are interpreted and the actions that must be
taken when the option "none of the above" get more votes than the multiple
candidates.

It's not my intention to teach you something here, but it does look very
bizarre that the legal counsel never bothered to help the board to make
 the guidelines unambiguous  and conform to members expectations.


> Consequently this option has to be taken in consideration when finalising
> the results.
> Where there were two candidates. The options for voters were (1) yes for
> candidate (1)-((2) yes for candidate 2-(3) yes for non of the above.Each
> one is mutually exclusive.
> Each score to be counted separately. The majority for either option wins
> the day.
>

Following  your reasoning above and the guidelines which say the candidate
with the highest votes win, the members and community should then accept
"none of the above" as the elected candidate and seated although "none of
the above " did not go through Nomcom and was not listed on the candidates
slates  published by Nomcom.

Which means seat 2 should not be declared vacant to be filled by board.

Filling  seat 2 by board would constitute the violation of "none  of the
above" rights and of our rules and thus expose us to legal litigation.



> One should not create a fictitious majority by adding votes polled by (1)
> & (2) together. The real majority was to all intents and purposes the
> option which polled the most votes. There is no need to extrapolate or
> interpret.
>

There is No fictitious majority being created. It was just an example of
how this case could have been interpreted just like you do have your own
interpretation.

In many cases,  abstention is compared to voters in order to decide how to
proceed with  validating an election and counting results..



> Where there was one candidate there were two options- Yes for the single
> candidate or yes for  "non of the above"
>

The case of a sole candidate is clear as per the guidelines and there are
no objections on seat 5 and 6 results.


> My reference to Art 10.2 was based on the decision of the members present
> at  past AGMMs to have the option of rejecting a single candidate or to
> give their approval to the single candidate, This has occurred more than
> once.
>

And once again,  the case of a single candidate is handled as members
agreed to and not debated

Thank you



> Legal Counsel AFRINIC.
>
>
> On 24/05/2018 21:11, Arnaud AMELINA wrote:
>
> Dear CEO and Chairman
>
> It looks like the Legal counsel has not  responded to this query bellow
> regarding this very important issue about the recently concluded elections.
>
> Could you kindly remind him?
>
> Let us address this to a good conclusion in order to enforce the respect
> of our rules and processes.
>
> Regards
>
> Arnaud
>
> Le sam. 19 mai 2018 11:40, Omo Oaiya  a écrit :
>
>> Dear Legal Counsel,
>>
>> Thanks for your input.  Much appreciated.
>>
>> Your statements reinforce the interpretation of section 9.2 of the
>> guidelines with the origin of the "none of the above" option in the
>> election process and how votes for this option are considered in the case
>> of one candidate running for election for a seat. [Last bullet point]
>>
>> Case in which the election becomes a "yes" or "no"  vote for the only
>> candidate.   This point is clear and accepted and the objection is not for
>> the results for seat 5

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Faulty result for Western Africa in AfriNIC AGMM Elections

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Dear CEO and Chairman

It looks like the Legal counsel has not  responded to this query bellow
regarding this very important issue about the recently concluded elections.

Could you kindly remind him?

Let us address this to a good conclusion in order to enforce the respect of
our rules and processes.

Regards

Arnaud

Le sam. 19 mai 2018 11:40, Omo Oaiya  a écrit :

> Dear Legal Counsel,
>
> Thanks for your input.  Much appreciated.
>
> Your statements reinforce the interpretation of section 9.2 of the
> guidelines with the origin of the "none of the above" option in the
> election process and how votes for this option are considered in the case
> of one candidate running for election for a seat. [Last bullet point]
>
> Case in which the election becomes a "yes" or "no"  vote for the only
> candidate.   This point is clear and accepted and the objection is not for
> the results for seat 5 and 6.
>
> What has not been clarified is how the same principle came to be applied
> for the elections for seat 2 which had two candidates running for the seat,
> one of whom got higher votes than the other, with the total number of
> members casting votes in excess of those opting out.
>
> You also referred to art 10.2 of the constitution but did not elaborate on
> the precedence that occurred that has become an integral part of
> our guidelines.  As precedence automatically becomes part of the election
> guidelines, it is important that we address issues which come up around the
> election with care and unambiguously.
>
> Can you be so kind to clarify?
>
> Best wishes
> Omo
>
> PS:  Grateful to listers to please keep this thread confined to the
> subject.
>
>
>
> On 17 May 2018 at 17:17, Ashok  wrote:
>
>> Dear Members and Community,
>> Mt views have been sought on the matter under reference.
>> Please find same hereunder.
>>
>> On 17/05/2018 14:04, B
>>
>> *The Election Process and last AGMM.*
>>
>> The appointment of Directors is carried out during an AGMM of the Company
>> –Art 13.1 of the constitution.
>>
>> The election of the Directors is carried out in terms of Art 13.2 of the
>> constitution which refers expressly to the election process approved by the
>> Board.
>>
>> Moreover  Art 10.2 of the Constitution refers to precedent applied
>> during an AFRINIC election and which de facto become part of the election
>> guidelines.
>>
>> The election process  as it stands today is the one which was applied
>> during  the elections held during the last AGMM without any opposition.
>>
>> This is what it provides:
>>
>> *9.2 Paper Ballot on Election Day*
>>
>> The voting conducted during the Annual General Members' Meeting is
>> carried out via paper ballots containing a list of candidate names and a
>> ballot number. Prior to the vote, all members present or participants
>> holding a proxy will be requested to register and validate their membership
>> status.
>>
>>- Voters should only vote for one candidate per category/region. Each
>>  mark on a ballot paper represents one vote. A ballot with more than 
>> one
>>  mark per category/region will be considered spoilt, and not be 
>> counted.
>>  - The ballot paper should provide voters with the option to not
>>  vote for any candidate (a.k.a. "None of the Above").
>>  - This will be a secret ballot election. An inclusion of any
>>  personal data on the ballot paper will invalidate the vote and will 
>> be
>>  counted as spoilt.
>>  - Elections will be closed as soon as the last member or proxy
>>  present in the meeting room casts his/her vote. Candidates with the 
>> highest
>>  number of votes in each category will be declared winners.
>>  - In the event of a tie for an open position, voting for that
>>  position will be repeated (Only by paper ballot) the same day until 
>> there
>>  is a winner.
>>  - All open positions shall be subject to an election process
>>  even if there is only one candidate. In that event, if the option 
>> [none of
>>  the above] got more votes than the only candidate, then the seat 
>> shall be
>>  considered vacant and the Board will be requested to apply
>>  provisions of the Bylaws to temporarily fill the vacant seat
>>
>> The last amendment of the election guidelines introduced the voting
>> option “ None of the Above”. –(Vide second bullet point above.)Those voters
>> who have cast their votes for “ None of the Above” have done so in
>> compliance with the prevailing  constitution  and these are thus valid
>> votes. Every voter was aware of the new option.
>>
>> The election guidelines are clear as to what happens when the “ None of
>> the Above” option has a majority.- (Vide last bullet point above.)
>>
>> The election guidelines must be read as a whole and all the provisions
>> read together.
>>
>> Legal Counsel –AFRINIC
>>
>> 17.05.2018
>> 

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Faulty result for Western Africa in AfriNIC AGMM Elections

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi Roberts,

Humm !  Good to hear that your organization specifically sees an
improvement in AFRINIC services under the not so new CEO.

These things are better measured through members satisfaction survey, audit
reports, financial statements and even the CEO perfomance evaluation
through a board report.

Management of the organisation doesnt seem so satisfactory to this end.

In all cases, if management and governance were not so chaotic, services
could have been much better and the community healthier.

Organizations live, actors change, facts and history tell the truth.

Arnaud


Le ven. 18 mai 2018 09:56, Ben Roberts  a
écrit :

> Badru,
> We are also a RIPE member and have been since before Afrinic existed.
>
> Our fees with Afrinic are about 15 times what they would be with RIPE for
> equivalent IP resources. And RIPE gives us more services.
>
> Service delivery from Afrinic was also historically poor but improved
> hugely under the leadership of new CEO Mr Barrett.
>
> So I’m speaking from experience as an Afrinic member.
>
> Are you an LIR these days?  Is your experience of Afrinic value for money
> better than mine ?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 18 May 2018, at 10:39, Badru Ntege  wrote:
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 18 May 2018, at 12:10, Ben Roberts 
> wrote:
>
> Noah,
>
>
>
> Yes one of the ways that Afrinic wastes lots of money flying people
> around. This contributes to why our fees are so high compared to other RIRs
> we are in.
>
> Sorry to get personal but for someone of your experience and looking at
> the financials over the last few years taunting the above line is pure
> misinformation.
>
> Secondly a company of your size what you pay AFRINIC is probably a
> fraction of someone’s salary.
>
> Fees are based on your consumption if your business is growing and you
> need more resources you not only make a justification to AFRINIC but also
> to the Business.
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 18 May 2018, at 09:41, Noah  wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 5:38 PM, Ben Roberts <
> ben.robe...@liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
>
>> All,
>> The election was run and winner declared. Majority of votes cast to have
>> none of the candidates join the board.
>>
>
> So its pointless to have a nomcom in other-words and therefore AfriNIC
> will be wasting members money to conduct elections which involves
> facilitating members of nomcom to fly to meetings to conduct elections
> where no candidate is elected.
>
> Come on folks...
>
> Noah
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

[Community-Discuss] Congratulations Moez Chakchouk

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Dear Community


Let us congratulate our own Moez Chakchouk for his appointment as Assistant
Director-General for Communication and Information for UNESCO [1].


For those who remember well, Moez was a candidate for AfriNIC CEO position
in 2015 and also candidate to the AfriNIC BoD in 2016.


Let us wish him all the best on this new endavour.


Regards

Anaud


[1] https://en.unesco.org/news/unesco-executive-appointments
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Allegation of Harassment

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi, Community

Enough is enough... The discussions and opinions expressed by Owen showed
once again who he is and what are  his intentions and goals about Afrinic
success... we all remember his thoughts and almost insults to Afrinic
pioneers ( Vaporware.  ..). Let us ignore him, but always consider  any
good  and constructive advices or opinions he might have from time to time.

Arnaud


2018-03-27 8:28 GMT+00:00 Mirriam via Community-Discuss <
community-discuss@afrinic.net>:

> Owen
>
> >>My objection was not to those calling for his >>resignation. It was to
> those calling for his >>dismissal from the board without due >>process.
>
> You mean due process after he admitted to having shared private
> information which tantamount to a breach of the NDA.
>
> Didn't you see that section? The community referred to a similar
> historical event where board members had resigned from board under similar
> circumstance of breach of NDA.
>
> Don't use words to play with the community, people here are not foolish.
>
> Like i said, only you Owen, only you.
>
> Mirriam.
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> 
>
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 11:10 AM, Owen DeLong
>  wrote:
>
> On Mar 27, 2018, at 00:26 , Mirriam  wrote:
>
> Owen
>
> Please give the community members who called for Sundays resignation some
> respect will you!
>
>
> My objection was not to those calling for his resignation. It was to those
> calling for his dismissal from the board without due process.
>
> We are not a mob, but intelligent enough people to know what is wrong and
> what is right.
>
>
> Perhaps in the case of what you describe, that is true. In the case of
> what I was objecting to, not so much.
>
> Someone admits to wrong doing and members of the community come out to ask
> for his resignation as due process goes on, and you have the guts to call
> them a mob.
>
> Only you owen, only you indeed.
>
>
> You are entitled to your opinion.
>
> Owen
>
>
> Mirriam
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> 
>
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:49 AM, Owen DeLong
>  wrote:
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
> 
>
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Allegation of Harassment

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Owen,

In what capacity are you writting?  as a simple community member or
 Reverend Sunday's lawyer?

The reason i ask is because the ardor you put in defending the defendants
surprises me a lot.

Why don't you let the reverend defend himself! He is mature enough and has
been chairing the board for a while.

As usual you are trying to play the devil, but the current scenario
requires care and a sense of responsibility as the attitude one would
expect from an ARIN AC member.

Please let this community shows you how we handle issues which may differ
from where you come fom.

Accept the difference and learn for once.

Regards

Arnaud


Le ven. 23 mars 2018 20:51, Owen DeLong  a écrit :

>
> On Mar 22, 2018, at 21:41 , Badru Ntege 
> wrote:
>
>
> One becomes a board member as result of the will of the community through
> an election.  The ultimate owner of AFRINIC is the community.
>
>
> Technically, this is not quite accurate. One becomes a board member by the
> result of an election by the resource members, not the community. The
> community is a much larger body.
>
> The community is saying it has lost faith in the office bearer
> investigation or not since what the office bearer has admitted to is enough
> for community to feel he is no longer suitable.
>
>
> Again, this is also not quite true. Some members of the community are
> saying this, but no objective deterministic research has been presented
> showing that this position is held by a majority of the community.
>
> The office bearer also has an allegation which is personal and that needs
> to be investigated since it has far reaching implications to the
> individuals involved.
>
>
> At least there is one true statement in your email.
>
> The community is saying we need to move and he steps aside deals with his
> issues without affecting AFRINIC business. I think this is only fare.
>
>
> Some members of the community are saying this. Other members are calling
> for a rational approach to a valid and fair investigation and due process.
>
> However at the moment we are all being held hostage due to decisions made
> earlier.
>
>
> This is simply sensationalism which has no legitimate place in the
> discussion. Nobody is being held hostage. I realize that it is popular to
> use this term as rhetoric in AfriNIC discussions, but really, there are no
> prisoners here. There are no hostages. The due process is being followed
> with reasonable deliberate haste.
>
> We need to move
>
>
> What kind of movement are you seeking? Do you propose that we gather a
> lynch mob and take out all of those who are accused without bothering to
> investigate or establish the true facts of the situation?
>
> I’m sure this would satisfy the more vocal members of the community, but I
> do not think it would shine a positive light on AfriNIC going forward.
>
> I am very happy to see the current leadership attempting to continue with
> due process under the circumstances despite the mob mentality being
> expressed on this and other lists.
>
> Owen
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 23 Mar 2018, at 07:33, Sunday Olutayo  wrote:
>
> Why is judgment being pass without investigation and hearing? Why are some
> people eager to be the hangmen without due process? I believe in justice,
> and it can only be obtained or dispersed through due process.
>
> We can not be passing judgment of yet to be proofed allegations. So let
> follow due process, the independent committee should it work.
>
> Regards,
> Sunday Olutayo
> On Mar 22, 2018 11:39 AM, Noah  wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2018, 5:57 p.m. Wayne Diamond,  wrote:
>
>
> Some body from the AfriNic board that is *NOT* implicated in either the
> harassment or breach of NDA needs to take control *now* and make a
> decisive statement to the community in the very near future (as in 72
> hours) in order to inform the community of what is being done about each of
> the issues.
>
> Thanks Wayne
>
> And to be pricise we have below board members who seem to lack cohesion
> but i could be wrong.
>
> Mr.Masilela Lucky
> Mr.Abibu Ntagihiye
> Mr.Bope Christian
> Mr.Ilunga Serge
> Mr.Ojedeji Seun
> Mr.Subramanian Moonesamy
> Mr.Alan Barrett (ex-officio)
>
> The reputation of AfriNic and the community cannot wait until the end of
> April for an investigation to start.
>
> +++1
>
>
>
> To the board that are not involved in either, get your act together
> quickly or step down for a new interim board to be appointed in order to
> resolve this but this cannot continue any longer in this manner.
>
>
> +++1
>
> Noah
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> 

Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Removal of a director

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi Community,

Time has come for those who occupied leadership position in AfriNIC to show
honesty and wisdom or simply keep quiet. Misleading and false authoritative
 claims on sensitive  issues like this one never help this community.
Apologies or not, the damage has been caused.

Regards

Arnaud


2017-12-17 22:10 GMT+00:00 Andrew Alston :

> Ok,
>
>
>
> Because what I have to say in here is extremely long – let me start with
> the summary – because what I had said before hand was not entirely accurate
> – and the for that I apoligse (and I explain below where I believe I erred
> and how what I said can still be made to occur even in the event of that
> error).  I have also copied in the community list on this – since I believe
> this discussion is best moved there – and the only reason I am still
> sending it to the RPD is that the original questions were asked there.  If
> I can please request that further discussion of this issue go either to the
> members list or the community list – thanks.
>
>
>
> One final point before I get into this – I am no lawyer – I know this –
> and what I write below is my own interpretation of the companies act and
> the company’s bylaws – which I have spent substantial time studying.  If
> what I say has any factual inaccuracies – I welcome dissenting opinions
> that I can further learn from – so long as they are backed by citation of
> relevant material – objection with no substantiation is meaningless.
>
>
>
> The summary though is as follows:
>
>
>
> – YES the members can remove a director – the process would be as follows:
>
>
>
>1. Utilizing clause 7.6.viii of the bylaws invoke an SGMM – for the
>purposes of passing a special resolution to amend the bylaws to allow the
>community to remove a director – and please note – that special resolution
>could set the required voting percentage to remove said director at
>whatever they liked – there is now low watermark – it is subject to
>whatever is in the constitution (as per section 138.2 of the companies act)
>2. Once (a) was completed – call a second SGMM –  for the express
>purpose of the removal of one or more directors – send out the notice of
>said meeting with the required 14 day notice period - and then pass a
>resolution as permitted by the process performed in (a)
>
>
>
> Now – for those who want all the gruesome details – keep reading.
>
>
>
> So I’ve had some time – and some of what I said was inaccurate – though
> not all of it – so let me explain my view point and we can then take it
> from  there:
>
>
>
> Firstly – the company has no shareholders – it has members (the registered
> directors being the ones with the legal liability and the fiduciary
> responsibility)
>
>
>
> What this means is that effectively the Afrinic members are powerless –
> unless you follow the idea that as non-registered members we hold the same
> rights as shareholders would.  This has been the line from the board many
> times before this community – though I have occasionally found this to be
> pretty selective – choosing what suits them as a need for registered
> members vs standard members.
>
>
>
> But – if we are to assume that members have the rights of shareholders –
> for arguments sake – then we have to refer to two points – one being the
> companies act and the other being the bylaws.
>
>
>
> AfriNIC is a private company – it has 9 members – therefore – we have to
> discount the following:
>
>
>
> Section 138 of the companies act:
>
>
>
> (1) *Notwithstanding anything in its constitution* or in any agreement
> between it and a director, a director of a *public* company may be
> removed from office by an ordinary resolution passed at a meeting called
> for the purpose that include the removal of a director.
>
>
>
> What this means is – in a public company – the shareholders can remove a
> director – and it doesn’t matter what the bylaws or constitution say – they
> have the right via a 50% majority at an SGMM to revoke a director.
>
>
>
> So – and this is where I err’ed:
>
>
>
> (2) *Subject to the constitution of a company*, a director of a private
> company may be removed from office by *special resolution* passed at a
> meeting called for the purpose that include the removal of the director.
>
>
>
> (3) The notice of meeting shall state that the purpose of the meeting is
> the removal of the director.
>
>
>
> What this says is – if the bylaws allowed it – we could remove a director
> via special resolution at an SGMM – now – it could be argued that the
> bylaws do not PREVENT this – however – they do offer an alternative – so my
> guess is – those who say that only directors can remove a director could be
> technically correct – and it would come down to legal interpretation – it
> would be interesting to see what happened if someone chose to attempt to
> invoke this if the board would see fit to fight it or realize that anyone
> who has managed to 

[Community-Discuss] How good was Afrinic-27 ?

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi Community,

As a frequent afrinic meetings participant, I found AFRINIC27 to be one the
most productive meetings of the recent years.  Good presentations, cordiale
and respectful interactions with  focus  on issues in meeting rooms and
aside.

I congrats the community, AfriNIC staff, CEO and the Board and hope to see
more of such meetings...

Regards

Arnaud
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [AFRINIC-Announce] AFRINIC Annual Financial Statements 2016

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Thanks Chair, for your response.

CEO appointment announcement (*) reads:


27 March 2015, Ébène:  AFRINIC’s Board of Directors today announced the
appointment of Mr Alan Barrett as the new Chief Executive Officer (CEO). Mr
Barrett replaces AFRINIC’s founding CEO, Adiel A. Akplogan, and will assume
the role on 20 April 2015 for an initial three-year term.


It means the CEO served for 8 months in 2015. Humm!  Are you saying the CEO
worked for 3 full months without payment?


(*) https://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1351-announcement-alan-barrett-
appointed-as-afrinic-ceo

Regards

Arnaud


Le 1 juin 2017 12:40, "Sunday Folayan"  a écrit :

> Dear Noah,
> Find interlaced, my response to your questions.
>
> On 25/05/2017 01:20, Noah wrote:
>
> Hello Board Chair,
>
> While going through this approved Financial Statements by the Board, I
> have noted concerns that needs some clarifications.
>
> 1. Total emoluments and other benefits given to directors by the Company
> during the year *2016 were 164.72*  compared to *74.49 in 2015 a 221%
> increase in spend on directors*.
>
> Can I ask the reason for such an Increase and can the membership have a
> breakdown of this figure made public.
>
>
> There was no increase, neither is there a breakdown to give. The CEO was
> only fully remunerated in 2016 (12 Months). CEO was only paid for 5 months
> in 2015.
>
>
> 2. At 31 December 2016, trade receivables amounting to *USD 39,199 in
> 2016* compared to *2015 : USD 26,098*, were impaired and written off
> during the year meaning we are not managing our collections. This situation
> was expected to improve but that doesn't seem to be the case.
>
>
> The Fees collection situation indeed improved, but the $39,199 you see, is
> defaults from members who went out of business. AFRINIC has no control over
> members going out of business. It does not make sense to pursue the
> recovery of such small amounts using the legal option.
>
>
> Can I get some clarifications considering in Gaborone when I tasked the
> board for explain, the board indicated the situation would improve.
>
>
> There you are!
>
>
>
> Noah
>
>
> Sunday Folayan.
> Chair, AFRINIC Board
>
>
>
>
>
> Noah
>
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:58 AM, AFRINIC Communication <
> comm-annou...@afrinic.net> wrote:
>
>> Dear Colleagues,
>>
>> AFRINIC is pleased to advise that the Annual Financial Statements for the
>> financial year to December 2016 is now available at:
>> https://www.afrinic.net/images/doc/Unsigned_AFS_2016.pdf
>>
>> Kindly take note that, at its meeting on the 19th April 2017, AFRINIC
>> Board approved the Audited Financial Statements as presented (board
>> resolution 201704.332  - https://www.afrinic.net/about/
>> bod/meeting/2017#r332).
>>
>> All the required signatures are being assembled and once completed, a
>> fully signed and complete set of 2016 Audited Financial Statements together
>> with the signed External Auditors reports and Opinions shall be published.
>>
>> As per the bylaws Section 7.6  the audited financial statement will be
>> presented at the AGMM on 1 June 2017, for adoption by the members.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Announce mailing list
>> annou...@afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *./noah*
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing 
> listCommunity-Discuss@afrinic.nethttps://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
> --
> --
> Sunday Adekunle Folayan
> Managing Director
> General data Engineering Services (SKANNET)
> 16 Oshin Road, Kongi Bodija, Ibadan - Nigeria
> Phone: +234 802 291 2202 <+234%20802%20291%202202>, +234 816 866 7523 
> <+234%20816%20866%207523>
> Email: sfola...@skannet.com.ng, sfola...@gmail.com
> ---
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Controversial anti-shutdown policy discussed at RIPE

[Arnaud AMELINA]

+1 Dear Mirriam and Badru

Cela sera fixé par notre projet de politique PDP-BIS.

This will be fixed by our PDP-BIS policy proposal.

@Saul, je confirme que cette politique de shutdown est inopportune sur le
PDP, c'est une véritable perte de temps, car d'autres politique ssont sur
la table du PDP et personne n'a encore réagit par rapport à elles et on
tourne autour d'une politique dont tout le monde sait qu'elle n'aboutira
pas, et on nous avance comme argument le débat que ça va susciter, c'est
comme si on se moque de notre communauté de techniciens. Nous ne sommes pas
Politiciens, laissons cet aspect à ceux qui en ont la compétence, pour en
débattre, et nous nous serons là en appui à leur décision. Dicsutons sur
les choes qui feront avancer afrinic eet non celles qui lui créeront des
problèmes. JE voudrais inviter tous les membres de cette communauté à se
concentrer sur les vrais missions d'Afrinic et débatre de son avenir. Merci
pour votre conmpréhension.


@Saul, I confirm that this shutdown policy is inappropriate on the PDP, it
is a real waste of time because other policies are on the PDP table and
nobody has yet reacted with them and we turn Around to  a policy that
everyone knows will not succeed, and we are advanced as an argument the
debate that will arouse, it is like we laugh at our community of
technicians. We are not Politicians, we leave it to those who have the
competence to debate it, and we will be there to support their decision. Let
us discuss on things that will move AFRINIC forward instead of those that
will create problems. I would like to invite all members of this community
to focus on Afrinic's real missions and to discuss its future. Thank you
for your understanding.

Cordialement.

Arnaud.

2017-05-12 7:10 GMT+00:00 Saul Stein :

> Hi,
>
>
>
> Please can you explain how this is an abuse of the RPD?
>
>
>
> We have a serious issue of internet shutdowns on our continent. The impact
> that it has on education, the economy etc is immeasurable!
>
> This should be of grace concern to all of us!
>
>
>
> The authors of the policy have stated numerous times that this is an
> evolving proposal.
>
>
>
> The important thing is that it is encouraging global debate on how to
> resolve this issue. THAT is what this proposal is about – ways to prevent
> this from happening.
>
>
>
> Whatever solutions we come up with – but that can only happen with this
> debate, so I don’t see how it’s a waist!
>
>
>
> Saul
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Mirriam [mailto:mirriamlau...@yahoo.com]
> *Sent:* 11 May 2017 08:24 PM
> *To:* Tutu Ngcaba ; Mark Elkins 
> *Cc:* General Discussions of AFRINIC ;
> AfriNIC List 
> *Subject:* Re: [Community-Discuss] Controversial anti-shutdown policy
> discussed at RIPE
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> I totally agree with what Badru has stated and I really hope the PDP
> update policy proposal on the table before us can help to improve the
> Afrinic policy development process and environment notwithstanding quality
> of work so as to avoid such abuses of the pdp.
>
>
>
> KR,
>
> Mirriam
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, May 10, 2017, 1:41:29 PM GMT+3, Tutu Ngcaba <
> pan.afrik...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Brother Elkins,
>
>
>
> The ICANN chairman Steve said some concern of internet shutdown will
> undermine the missions of Icann and the Afrinic and they two have the 
> potential
> power to do something in return.
>
>
>
> The Afrinic Government Working Group AFGWG can work with the ICANN to
> achieve more mutlistakeholders talkings and meetings. This is what needs to
> be done in return.
>
> I ask the AFGWG to do some taking to the ICANN and they can meet our
> governments for education on economic important of Internet.
>
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Tutu Ngcaba
> Kwazulu Techno Hubs
> South Africa
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10 May 2017 12:53 p.m., "Mark Elkins"  wrote:
>
> I downloaded the complete video  from RIPE and watched it a few times. I
> was also watching live.
>
> Its large - but if you can do, download it and watch it.
>
> https://ripe74.ripe.net/archiv e/video/Andrew_Alston-Anti-
> Shutdown_Policies_-_The_Ration ale-20170508-171822.mp4
> 
> '
>
>
>
> Then again, when the Chairman of ICANN stands up and says that ICANN can
> help.
>
> "Hi, my name is Steve Crocker, I am Chairman of ICANN and I'm here to help
> you. (Regarding) take out of the root the affected ccTLD names" and he then
> volunteered assistance from ICANN staff - also saying it would take between
> two and five years to get to a decision whether to proceed or not.
>
> The current policy concept does not go that far - but to me - certainly
> suggests that the idea of punitive actions against governments is worth
> looking at.
>
> I regard it like a nuclear bomb. When in the hands of sane people (RIR's

Re: [Community-Discuss] Who is the guarantor of AFRINIC

[Arnaud AMELINA]

2017-04-13 17:00 GMT+00:00 Tutu Ngcaba <pan.afrik...@gmail.com>:

> Brother Arnaud,
>
> I also follow comments from that register article and a lot of people
> ridicule the Africa community which is not good due to mistake from that
> Author McCathry.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Tutu Ngcaba
> Kwazulu Techno Hubs
> South Africa
>
>
Brother Tutu, I followed with attention all of your intervention.
Congratulation, for your good and wised observations.

Regards

Arnaud.

>
> On 13 Apr 2017 3:27 p.m., "Arnaud AMELINA" <ameln...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> *English :*
>>
>> Dear member of the community, What is the aim of the authors and the
>> initiators of this Article ???
>>
>> Do they have the right to share a process that has not yet been adopted
>> externally, still coming from a member of the Board of Afrinic, is
>> unacceptable, is there no longer any limit In AFRINIC, that the
>> different leaders take their respononsibilities and remind to the order the
>> indelices
>>
>> The name AFRINIC has been engaged in this article, even though the
>> subject in question has not yet ratified by the community of AFRINIC or the
>> BOARD.
>>
>>
>> *French :*
>> Chers membre de la communauté, Quel est le but visé par les auteurs et
>> les initiateurs de cet Article ??? <https://www.theregister.co.uk/>
>> Ont-il le droit de faire part d'un processus non encore adopté à
>> l'extérieur, venant encore de la part d'un membre du Board d'Afrinic c'est
>> innacceptable, n'y a-t-il plus de limite à AFRINIC, que les différents
>> responsables prennent leurs respponsabilités et rappellent à l'odre les
>> indélicats.
>>
>> Le nom d'AFRINIC a été engagé dans cet article alors même que le sujet en
>> question ne soit ratifié par la communauté d'AFRINIC ou par le BOARD.
>>
>>
>> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/>
>> [image: Twitter]
>> <https://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=theregister> [image:
>> Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/VultureCentral> [image: G+]
>> <https://google.com/+theregister> [image: LinkedIn]
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-register>
>> [image: Home] <https://www.theregister.co.uk/> Data Centre
>> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/data_centre/> Software
>> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/software/> Security
>> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/security/> Transformation
>> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/transformation/> DevOps
>> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/devops/> Business
>> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/business/> Personal Tech
>> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/personal_tech/> Science
>> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/science/> Emergent Tech
>> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/emergent_tech/> Bootnotes
>> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/bootnotes/> [image: search]
>> <https://search.theregister.co.uk/>
>> Data Centre <https://www.theregister.co.uk/data_centre/> [image: Arrow]
>> Networks <https://www.theregister.co.uk/data_centre/networks/>
>> No more IP addresses for countries that shut down internet access Afrinic
>> considers punitive policy for errant governments
>> [image: reddit]
>>
>> <https://www.reddit.com/submit?url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/04/12/no_ip_addresses_for_countries/=No%20more%20IP%20addresses%20for%20countries%20that%20shut%20down%20internet%20access>
>> [image: Twitter]
>>
>> <https://twitter.com/share?text=No%20more%20IP%20addresses%20for%20countries%20that%20shut%20down%20internet%20access=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/04/12/no_ip_addresses_for_countries/=theregister>
>> [image: Facebook]
>> [image: linkedin]
>>
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/04/12/no_ip_addresses_for_countries/=No%20more%20IP%20addresses%20for%20countries%20that%20shut%20down%20internet%20access=Afrinic%20considers%20punitive%20policy%20for%20errant%20governments>
>> 12 Apr 2017 at 19:54, Kieren McCarthy
>> <https://www.theregister.co.uk/Author/2886>
>>
>> Governments that cut off internet access to their citizens could find
>> themselves refused new IP addresses under a proposal put forward by one of
>> the five global IP allocation organizations.
>>
>> The suggested clampdown
>> <https://www.afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development/policy-proposals/2061-anti-shutdown-01>
>> will be considered at the next meeting of internet registry Afrinic in
>> Botswana in June: Afrinic is in charge of managin

[Community-Discuss] Update to Resources review policy proposal

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi community !
Following, recent discussions and in accordance with text proposal from
Owen and others contributors, authors propose this as replacement to the
section 3.3.3

-'---old version---''

3.3.3 Reported: Here, members are reviewed either because:

a. They have requested the review themselves or
b. There has been a community complaint made against them that warrants
investigation.

new version-

3.3.3 Reported: Here, members are reviewed either because:

a..They have requested the review themselves or
b. There has been a community complaint made against them that warrants
investigation. Complaints shall be backed by evidence and AFRINIC  staff
shall evaluate the facts as appropriate to conduct the review. However this
review is not applicable to a member  on which a full review has been
completed in the preceding 24 months.

Regards.

Arnaud.
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Bylaws changes

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hello,
Ì can see under this link https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html

Special Policy Actions

10.1 Emergency PDP

If urgently necessary pursuant to ARIN’s mission, the Board of Trustees may
initiate policy by declaring an emergency and posting a Recommended Draft
Policy on the PPML for discussion for a minimum of 14 days. The Advisory
Council will review the Recommended Draft Policy within 7 days of the end
of the discussion period and make a recommendation to the Board of
Trustees. If the Board of Trustees adopts the policy, it will be presented
at the next Public Policy Meeting for reconsideration

Arin has this in its pdp.Anything to learn from for this discussion?

Le 12 nov. 2016 11:11, "Alan Barrett"  a écrit :

>
> > On 12 Nov 2016, at 14:52, Christian Bope 
> wrote:
> > [Speaking on my own capacity.]
> >
> > As stated in my previous post related to item 13.
> > There are 2 key element we should all keep in mind and maintain.
> > 1. PDP guidelines shall be updated to describe how Board can adopt a
> policy.
> > 2. Board adopted policy must be ratified by the community. If not it is
> rejected.
>
> I’d say PDP guidelines should be updated to say how the community ratifies
> or rejects Board-adopted policy.
>
> On your point 2, yes, the proposed changes to Article 11.5 will give the
> community the power to reject Board-adopted policy.  Here’s the current
> version of the text:
>
> 11.5Endorsement of policy adopted by the Board:
> (i) Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4
> shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public
> policy meeting.
> (ii) In the event that such a policy submitted by the Board is not
> endorsed, the said policy shall not be enforced or implemented following
> its non-endorsement; however, any actions taken in terms of the policy
> prior to such non-endorsement shall remain valid.
>
> Sub-part (i) is the existing text.  Sub-part (ii) is new, and makes it
> clear that rejection by the community leads to the policy being cancelled.
>
>
> Alan Barrett
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Bylaws changes

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Le 9 nov. 2016 13:33, "Alan Barrett"  a écrit :
>
>
> > On 9 Nov 2016, at 18:36, ALAIN AINA  wrote:
> >
> > What i am sensing here is Board being involved in the “rough consensus”
process of the PDPWG  which is different from board adopting its own
policies which shall be submitted to the community for endorsement.
> >
> > Ok.  In case of deadlock as described above and if the board made the
decision over  policy proposals being discussed, why bring the  adopted
policy back to the same community for endorsement ?
>
> There are two ways to make policy:
>
> The normal way: Policy is made by the community and ratified by the
Board. See Bylaws 11.2 and 11.3, and the PDP.
>
> The unusual way: Policy is made by the Board and endorsed by the
community.  See Bylaws 11.4 and 11.5.
>
> The changes under discussion do not affect the normal process (PDP, and
Bylaws 11.2 and 11.3).  The changes under discussion are intended to
prevent the Board from abusing the unusual process (Bylaws 11.4 and 11.5).
>
> My example (not quoted) was  intended to illustrate why it is sometimes a
good idea to let the Baord adopt policies that do not reach rough consensus.
>
It seems to me that the problem that Alain is raising, is board involvement
in adoption of Policy proposals which do  not reach rough consensus for
adoption at the PDPWG level .

Regards

Arnaud

>
> Alan Barrett
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Bylaws changes

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Thanks Alan.

Looking forward to this new revision  to see the progress  level  of  the
discussions on these points and how close  are we  moving to  closing this
important matter about improving  accountability.

Regards

Arnaud

Le 31 oct. 2016 16:01, "Alan Barrett"  a écrit :

> Dear community,
>
> I expect to be able to post the next revision of the bylaws change
> suggestions on Friday 4 November.
>
> Alan Barrett
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] IPv4 depletion in AFRINIC will speed up IPv6 adoption - myth or fact?

[Arnaud AMELINA]

My Contribution through the lines of this message

2016-11-01 15:31 GMT+00:00 ALAIN AINA :

> Hello,
>
> On Oct 29, 2016, at 7:18 PM, Andrew Alston  com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Ø  Yes. the usual story. You only know. Others are either clueless or
> naive..
>
> Not at all, I’m sure there are plenty of people who may know better than
> me.  Unfortunately, as of yet, none of them have bothered to provide
> realistic ways of doing this that contain **detailed** proposals of how
> this would be accomplished and what the end results are.
>
>
> There are plenty of people here who know far more than me and you , but
> resolve not to speak as you have made this a low floor, repetitive and non
>  productive discussions.
>
> The policy proposal was introduced  on the 18 May 2016, and we have had
>  these discussions. RPD  and the  AFRINIC-24 policy archives are available.
>

+1 @Alain

Yes Andrew, we had good discussions  and a new version of the proposal
which  incorporated  the changes  was posted  Tuesday, 9 August 2016, the
link below :

http://www.afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development/policy-proposals/1827-internet-number-resources-review-by-afrinic


And I understood trough your e-mail posted on 14 October 2016, which is
cuts below, you finally express support to this Policy proposal.


"Just a question about the audit policy….

Is it agreed that if we have such a policy, we should also audit the v6
assignments people are holding that should be announced under the needs
based policy rules?

Thanks"

===
regards


>
> Now  that you have asked again, see below...
>
>
> See Alain, the difference here, I ask for hard facts and data – and when
> I’m asked for such I provide it – but I will not accept vague positions and
> unsubstantiated nonsense as the grounds for implementing a policy.
>
>
> a.)No one has yet proposed how these audits are meant to be
> realistically done beyond looking at the routing tables
>
>
> Policy proposals do not  dictate implementation, but describe principles
> to action.
>
> The policy  proposal aims to seek compliance to RSA which all members sign
> before applying for the number ressources. Section 4 of the RSA is very
> clear on parties responsibilities. http://www.
> afrinic.net/en/services/rs/rsa
>
> The policy proposal  says :
>
> ===
>
> 3.4 In case of non-compliance and if evidence has been established in
> accordance with the non-exhaustive list below:
>
>- Unjustified lack of visibility of the resource on the global routing
>table.
>- Breach of AFRINIC policies.
>- Breach of the provisions of the registration service agreement or
>other legal agreements between the organization holding the resource and
>AFRINIC.
>- Evidence that an organisation is no more operating and its blocks
>have not been transferred.
>- Unauthorized transfers of resources.
>
> ===
>
> Looking at the global  Internet routing table at a given time is an
> option. Visibility or not in the global Internet Routing Table gives an
> indication of how to reach the destination, but does not tell about
> utilisation. A prefix can easily be seen in the Global Internet Table
> without  being used.
>  Utilisation in compliance with RSA and policies is what is sought here.
> What AFRINIC will be trying to establish is utilisation based on justified
>  needs  and compliance with RSA. In doing so, Members are  bound to
> collaborate with AFRINIC as said in section 4.(4) below.
>
> ===
>
> (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.
>
> (ii) Such request for information may also be made where AFRINIC is
> investigating (reviewing) the applicant's utilisation of the numbering
> resources already assigned to it.
>
> (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 numbering resources;
>3. lead to the closure of an LIR and termination of the agreement by
>AFRINIC.
>
>
> ===
>
> Investigated members to provide  information and data to convince AFRINIC
> which may not need to do  much.
>
> “Say what you do, do what you say and prove it."
>
>
> b.)No one has proposed where the resources to do these audits are
> meant to come from
>
>
> AFRINIC as RIR is already committed to do this review as prescribed in the
> RSA. This proposal is just  guidelines on how to implement it.  But if
> there is a need for extra ressources, it is up to  AFRINIC staff to say so.
> The PDP has provision for staff analysis on Policy proposal. Shall
> co-chairs request one ?
>
>
> c.)No one has addressed the MASSIVE potential for 

Re: [Community-Discuss] IPv4 depletion in AFRINIC will speed up IPv6 adoption - myth or fact?

[Arnaud AMELINA]

+1 @Omo

Regards

Arnaud

Le 28 oct. 2016 09:52, "Omo Oaiya"  a écrit :

> Owen,
>
> This is now a distraction and the tangential discussions bound to make
> this confusing for some so I will conclude.
>
> - We know global regions where IPv4 is exhausted
> - We know that secondary markets have sprung up to make IPv4 more available
> - We know the rate of IPv6 penetration in those regions - generally low
> - Now we have data that shows that IPv6 penetration is not necessarily
> IPv6 usage and is generally less than reported.
>
> You don't support accelerated depletion of IPv4
> You don't have any data to support opinion that IPv4 depletion correlates
> with IPv6 uptake
>
> Hint: 4 mobile companies and netflix is not the entire internet ...not
> even in the US.
>
> I just needed to make this clear now that we have the attention of the
> community and co-chairs on how to proceed with the PDP
>
>
> On 28 October 2016 at 10:12, Owen DeLong  wrote:
>
>>
>> On Oct 28, 2016, at 1:28 AM, Omo Oaiya  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 28 October 2016 at 09:01, Andrew Alston > om> wrote:
>>
>>> Ø  Like others,  I would like to see widespread v6 adoption but we do
>>> need to be careful to explain the stats we provide especially for those who
>>> advocate to other stakeholders.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I 100% agree…
>>>
>>
>> Great
>>
>>
>>> and this is why I asked if it could be explained to me how the
>>> correlation between v4 depletion and v6 depletion was drawn from a
>>> presentation that refers entirely to GDP correlation on v6 deployment,
>>> because I honestly don’t understand that correlation.
>>>
>>
>> I don't know where you got this from.   Honest's point is that there is
>> NO correlation between IPv4 depletion and IPv6 uptake i.e that you and Owen
>> have opinions that are not supported by evidence or data
>>
>>
>>
>> You guys are talking across each other.
>>
>> Honest’s point may be that, but the presentation he referenced doesn’t
>> say what Honest said.
>>
>> It says that there is a correlation between GDP and IPv6 uptake, but that
>> there are pretty glaring anomalies even in that conclusion.
>>
>> Andrew is wondering how you equate a correlation in GDP to somehow
>> meaning a lack of correlation in IPv4 depletion. The presentation provided
>> no evidence of any such lack of correlation.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Sadly, I’ve heard deafening silence since then, and it seems that
>>> question is going unanswered.
>>>
>>
>> Perhaps because she was bemused at the lack of understanding?
>>
>>
>> If there is a lack of understanding, then it is among you and Honest
>> because the presentation referenced by Honest does not say what you are now
>> claiming it says.
>>
>> As someone from academia, Omo I am sure you agree with me that any
>>> conclusions drawn from a dataset need to be explained by the individual
>>> drawing the concerns in order for any weight to be applied to them?
>>>
>>
>> No I don't. She provided an interpretation of the dataset which she
>> argues is at odds with your opinions.  From what I can see, she is correct.
>>
>>
>> Which she are we referring to here? The one who gave the presentation at
>> LACNIC?
>>
>> If that is the case, then her conclusion is orthogonal to what we have
>> said about IPv4 depletion. Her conclusion is that there is a correlation
>> between gross domestic product per capita and IPv6 uptake. In other words,
>> the wealthiest nations are more likely to be early adopters of technology.
>>
>> This isn’t exactly startling news.
>>
>> However, it’s completely orthogonal to the question of whether lack of
>> IPv4 resources drives IPv6 adoption. Currently there isn’t a meaningful
>> lack of IPv4 resources anywhere except Asia. Even in Asia, they still
>> remain relatively inexpensive, though costs are rising. We are seeing
>> rising IPv6 adoption rates since APNIC, RIPE, and ARIN ran out of IPv4
>> addresses in their free pool. There are statistics to support this.
>>
>> IPv6 – Google
>> 
>>
>> For example.
>>
>>
>> It is up to you to defend your position with some data or substantiate an
>> argument from what she has provided.
>>
>>
>> So, the presentation you and Honest use to “prove” your point is
>> orthogonal to your point. That’s Andrew’s point.
>> I’ve now provided you with clear statistics showing that IPv6 uptake is
>> accelerating since depletion.
>>
>> Can we now stop arguing over whether IPv4 depletion drives IPv6 adoption
>> or not and get back to the real business at hand… Getting IPv6 deployed
>> before IPv4 melts down into a puddle of NATd scrambled bits with no meaning
>> left?
>>
>> Owen
>>
>>
>> -Omo
>> 
>> ___
>> Community-Discuss mailing list
>> 

Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Accountability assessment - PDP review?

[Arnaud AMELINA]

I do not agree with your opinion Andrew, since Co-Chaires have the
responsibility to lead the process, they automatically have the
responsibility to ensure its completion, and the only way is to determine
the rough consensus.

If I stand to your opinion, how do we determine  the "large"
number of members approval or rejecting the draft of the Policy?

Regards

Arnaud

Le 26 oct. 2016 11:45, "Andrew Alston"  a
écrit :

> I actually question this stance, and perhaps what I will be saying may be
> controversial, but this is how I see it.
>
>
>
> It is not – and cannot be – the job of the co-chairs to drive a process
> towards consensus.  It is the job of the authors of the policy to strive to
> read the communities wishes and adjust accordingly to gain the consensus
> (providing that they do not have to adjust to the point where they feel the
> proposal is mute, and if they do get to that point and that is the
> requirement to get the policy passed, it is up to the proposers discretion
> to withdraw or not).
>
>
>
> Why do I say that the co-chair’s cannot strive towards consensus:
>
>
>
> To do so implies that the co-chair’s have taken a position on the policy –
> and that they should ever do – it compromises neutrality.  If the community
> by and large rejects a policy proposal because they disagree with the vast
> majority of its contents, it is certainly not the job of the co-chair’s to
> drive towards a consensus and to influence that view point in favor of
> finding consensus for something which should (by the very fact that the
> community has rejected the majority of it) never reach consensus and should
> die as a result.
>
>
>
> The moment that we put it in the hands of the co-chair’s to start driving
> towards consensus, rather than simply gauging it, we are on a slippery
> slope where the neutrality mandate given to the chair’s becomes a moot
> point.  I don’t think we want to be in that situation personally.
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *sergekbk 
> *Date: *Wednesday, 26 October 2016 at 13:23
> *To: *Dewole Ajao , Omo Oaiya ,
> General Discussions of AFRINIC 
> *Cc: *"AfriNIC RPD MList." 
> *Subject: *Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Accountability assessment - PDP
> review?
>
>
>
> Hello Dewole,
>
> Don’t you think that  it is the role of the co-chairs to tavoid  the +1
> and -1 and drive the process  to consensus?
>
> With Regards.
>
>
>
> *Serge Ilunga*
>
> *Cell: +243814443160 <%2B243814443160>*
>
> *Skype: sergekbk*
>
> *R.D.Congo*
>
>  Original message 
>
> From: Dewole Ajao 
>
> Date: 10/26/2016 08:57 (GMT+01:00)
>
> To: Omo Oaiya , General Discussions of AFRINIC <
> community-discuss@afrinic.net>
>
> Cc: "AfriNIC RPD MList." 
>
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Accountability assessment - PDP review?
>
>
>
> Thank you for your inputs, Omo (and others).
>
> Each of the draft policy proposals at http://www.afrinic.net/en/
> community/policy-development/policy-proposals is a solution to an
> existing or foreseen problem as observed from the authors' viewpoint(s).
>
> To my knowledge, all proposals updated by their authors after the last
> public policy meeting have been duly returned to the mailing list by the
> co-chairs for further discussion. The quality of the resulting discourse is
> however dependent on the authors, the rest of the PDWG, and willingness to
> engage on the (granular) substance of the proposals rather than personal or
> ideological differences.
>
> At any point in time, the Policy Development Working Group (i.e. all who
> CHOOSE to participate on the RPD mailing list and/or in person at the
> public meetings) has the opportunity to provide feedback on the policy
> proposals. Authors of policy proposals can choose to incorporate the
> feedback received to produce an improved proposal that the majority of the
> community is (more) amenable to.
>
> I recommend that as a community, we should:
> seek solutions that are (roughly) acceptable
> rather than
> seek to impose our point of view (no matter how correct they may be) on
> everyone else.
>
> ALL OF US (policy authors or not) should channel our input toward
> solutions that build consensus rather than simplistically adding +1s and
> -1s on completely divergent points of view. Since we (supposedly) all have
> the best interests of the AFRINIC community at heart, we should seek to
> unite rather than divide. Operating in this manner, we would find that #3
> and #4 as listed in the preceding emails are actually non-issues.
>
> Regards,
> Dewole Ajao.
> PDWG co-Chair
>
> On 25/10/2016 09:05, Omo Oaiya wrote:
>
> Dear Community,
>
> I am not suggesting there is a problem with the PDP per se or criticising
> the co-chairs, past or present, but recent discussions on accountability
> and co-authoring a policy proposal has 

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment - bylaws changes

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Would you please announce these new criteria of "useful skills" for
prospective candidates and community to know? I suspect you must have some
that you are using to find the suitable female candidates from each of the
six afrinic regions.
How are you convincing people to nominate if they don't know the skills and
expertise you need? How balanced shall the gc be in terms of expertise?

Regards

Arnaud

Le 4 oct. 2016 14:18, "Mark Elkins" <m...@posix.co.za> a écrit :

> Firstly everybody, the AFRINIC Governance Committee Nomination process
> is due to close in one week.
>
> To nominate yourself or a candidate of your choice, please complete
> the nomination form at:
>
> https://registration.afrinic.net/events/node/25/
>
> Nomination deadline is 11 October 2016 at 2000UTC
>
> On 04/10/2016 12:50, Alan Barrett wrote:
> > On 4 Oct 2016, at 14:32, Arnaud AMELINA <ameln...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> It appears to me that such a committee requires certain expertise
> >> and skills just like board. For the board, the bylaws has some
> >> criteria and allow nomcom to add others.
> >
> > Yes, NomCom may add criteria beyond what’s in the Governance
> > Committee charter.  They appear to have decided not to do so.  I
> > don’t know whether they had particular reasons, but somebody from
> > NomCom is free to comment.
>
> For now, NomCom is not imposing extra criteria to limit whom we accept
> for Nomination. We would obviously like people with useful skills, etc.
> Technically, asking for a Nominee to be nominated by two (different)
> Members is an additional criteria - which however is becoming the norm.
>
> >> And if there is no requirement, on what basis will nomcom  evaluate
> >> the candidates? How will community comment on candidates during the
> >> public comment? Or if there is no evaluation and  members decide by
> >> mere vote,  what is the role  of nomcom?
>
> NomCom collects the Nominees so the Membership can choose. We hope to
> have more nominees than places but no more than a factor of between 2
> and 3, ie we would like to present between 6 and 9 people for the
> upcoming elections.
>
> We collect nominees by posting on the usual lists and by explicitly
> contacting people.
>
> NomCom explicitly noted that the GC nominees should be both language and
> gender diverse as well as geographically diverse. In order to achieve
> this, NomCom has been reaching out to find at least one suitable female
> candidate from each of the six AFRINIC regions.
>
> We are otherwise guided by:
>
> 5.2.1. The AFRINIC Membership shall elect three (3) members of the
> Governance Committee, using a procedure similar to that used for
> election of Directors to the AFRINIC Board.
>
> > NomCom’s role in Governance Committee elections is as similar as
> > possible to their role in Board elections, as given in section 9 of
> > the Bylaws.  They have significant freedom in how they perform their
> > task.
> >
> > When commenting on the suitability of any nominee or candidate, I
> > would hope that people consider the role of the Governanc Committee
> > as given in its charter, and the person’s ability to perform in such
> > a role.
> >
> > Alan Barrett
>
> --
> Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
> m...@posix.co.za   Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

[Arnaud AMELINA]

+1

Le 1 oct. 2016 13:55, "ALAIN AINA"  a écrit :

> Hello All,
>
> It is deplorable that this thread on proxy went in a such chaotic mode and
> one had the impression that people were talking without listening to each
> other.
>
> We have had so many times, discussions around AFRINIC Ltd(the company) and
> AFRINIC (the community), Bylaws vs Act, etc…. These threads can be found in
> the archives.
>
> The  most recent i could find is at  https://lists.afrinic.net/
> pipermail/community-discuss/2016-July/000432.html
>
> Beside the requirements of the Act and Mauritius laws, this community  has
> adopted rules and given rights to non “registered members” and “the
> Community” to suit the community needs through the bylaws.
>
> Ashok’s response was not meant for the public and so i won’t comment or
> refer to it, but It is clear that the proxy limitation for elections was a
> "community decision" to accommodate a situation and shall be treated as
> such.
>
> One would expect the debate to stay at the community level and not involve
> the Act. The community to discuss and agree on how to manage this issue.
>
> Referring to the Act beyond what its applied to “Registered members” seems
> inappropriate and  can lead to questioning  may other things…
>
> 1- Since “Resource members” are not recognised by the Act, why is the
> rules on proxy towards them subject to the Act ?
>
> 2- if we were to amend to comply to the Act, will this not only applied to
> the “Registered members”?
>
> 3- what is the meaning of the rights given to the “resource members” by
> the bylaws ?
>
>
> Furthermore, if we go back to the original discussion of amending the
> bylaws to improve the accountability:
>
> - who is being accountable to who ?
>
> - what powers does the "registered members" have over the organisation
> beyond electing the directors to become “Registered members” ?
>
> If i take my favorite example, point 11 of the assessment document(see
> below),how will amending the bylaws as suggested below will prevent the
> “Registered members”  from unilaterally amending the bylaws at 75% of votes
> among them as this would be by powers reserved  to the members, the
> “registered members” by the Act ?
> 
> 11- Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the
> AFRINIC
> Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the
> Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the
> Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all
> AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi) , so that the Registered Members
> (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader
> approval.
> ===
>
> All of these said, i suggest that we continue the discussions on the proxy
> and the general accountability improvement in the spirit of  AFRINIC, the
> Community.  The GC shall lead future discussion on AFRINIC legal status to
> fix this to the end.
>
> Hope this helps
>
> Bon weekend
>
> —Alain
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 30, 2016, at 4:24 PM, Alan Barrett 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ashok,
> >
> >> On 30 Sep 2016, at 15:27, Ashok Radhakissoon  wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Alan,
> >> I am only replying to you on this as I advise the Board only.It is only
> during an AGMM, when called upon, that i intervene.
> >
> > Actually, you replied to the mailing list, but no harm done.  I am also
> replying to the mailing list, and I have asked for the mailing list
> configuration to be changed so that it does not automatically add a
> “Reply-To” header in future.
> >
> >> You are right in stating that the Company's Act takes precedence over
> the bylaws.
> >> I recall that after the Cairo election, the Community felt that
> bringing a substantial number of proxies especially from a particular
> region where AFRINIC membership was dense could not from a "community "
> perspective give the best representation for the Africa regions.This is why
> the limitation of the number of proxies was introduced and voted by the
> community.
> >> This provision of the bylaws would in no way withstand legal challenge
> as suggested by
> >> Andrew.
> >
> > Thank you for the advice.  I suggest that the limit on pnumber of
> proxies should be removed.
> >
> > Alan Barrett
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Community-Discuss mailing list
> > Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Dear CEO, we appreciate  your contributions and clarification. However we
would like to remind you that your position does not allow you to make
decisions unilaterally, or to intervene in favor of options or proposals.
Good governance require you to remain neutral as you are the one in charge
of building consensus.

Regards

Arnaud

Le 30 sept. 2016 12:25, "Alan Barrett"  a écrit :

> Hi Ashok,
>
> > On 30 Sep 2016, at 15:27, Ashok Radhakissoon  wrote:
> >
> > Dear Alan,
> > I am only replying to you on this as I advise the Board only.It is only
> during an AGMM, when called upon, that i intervene.
>
> Actually, you replied to the mailing list, but no harm done.  I am also
> replying to the mailing list, and I have asked for the mailing list
> configuration to be changed so that it does not automatically add a
> “Reply-To” header in future.
>
> > You are right in stating that the Company's Act takes precedence over
> the bylaws.
> > I recall that after the Cairo election, the Community felt that bringing
> a substantial number of proxies especially from a particular region where
> AFRINIC membership was dense could not from a "community " perspective give
> the best representation for the Africa regions.This is why the limitation
> of the number of proxies was introduced and voted by the community.
> > This provision of the bylaws would in no way withstand legal challenge
> as suggested by
> > Andrew.
>
> Thank you for the advice.  I suggest that the limit on pnumber of proxies
> should be removed.
>
> Alan Barrett
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment - bylaws changes

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi Mr. Alan

IHO , While you may not see a problem others might; and it may be wiser to
ensure inclusion for transparency and accountability. Having 6 members of
GC to guarantee regional participation is a good governance practice.

Regards

Arnaud

Le 22 sept. 2016 08:52, "Alan Barrett"  a écrit :

>
> > On 22 Sep 2016, at 12:07, Benjamin Eshun  wrote:
> >
> > Dear Alan,
> >
> > I have a question, will the GC be added to the bye-laws.
>
> There is no need to add the Governance Committee to the bylaws.  It is a
> committee created by the Board in terms of the Board’s general powers, and
> the Bylaws section 15.3(x) “… the Directors shall be entitled to … appoint
> such committees for such reasons and with such terms of reference as they
> shall consider necessary or desirable."
>
> > Special when it states
> >
> > 5.1.2. All of the Board appointed members shall have their principal
> place of residence in different subregions of the AFRINIC service region.
> >
> > And
> >
> > 5.2.2. All of the elected members shall have their principal place of
> residence in different subregions of the AFRINIC service region.
> >
> > I wonder how  the selection of 5 is going to advance the regional
> diversity when Afrinic has 6 regions
>
> Yes, it’s true that a committee of 5 members cannot include a
> representative from all 6 sub-regions.  I don’t see that as a problem.
>
> Alan Barrett
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - committee

[Arnaud AMELINA]

+1

2016-09-21 10:24 GMT+00:00 ALAIN AINA :

>
> > On Sep 21, 2016, at 1:25 PM, Alan Barrett 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On 21 Sep 2016, at 13:08, ALAIN AINA  wrote:
> >> The whole discussion was about how we handle the issues. Large
> consultation and consensus is key. Adoption of the amendments  by “members”
> votes shall be administrative and legal formalities.
> >
> > Yes, I agree.  It’s important to have wide consultation and agreement
> before there is a vote on bylaws changes.  This discussion is part of that
> process.
>
> Ack. Thanks
>
> —Alain
> >
> > Alan Barrett
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Community-Discuss mailing list
> > Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment - bylaws changes

[Arnaud AMELINA]

+1 @Alain

Regards

Arnaud

2016-09-19 19:56 GMT+00:00 ALAIN AINA :

> Hi,
>
> Let’s fix the process and better organise this critical review of the
> bylawsl. I do support the idea of a committee .
>
> —Alain
>
>
> On Sep 19, 2016, at 4:25 PM, Bope Domilongo Christian <
> christianb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear CEO,
>
> [speaking as a member of the community]
>
> Following last week discussion on the accountability review and others
> points raised by the community which was not in your original document,
> here my response.
>
>
> 1.  *On the Accountability Review.*
>
> This review is from an independent AFRINIC's accountability review which
> identified areas need to be improved. Improving RIR accountability is very
> important in this context of IANA stewardship transition where the
> community will be exercising important role in the oversight of the IANA
> functions.
>
> So it is very crucial that the community gives this discussion the
> required attention and the consensual approach is more needed.
>
> It will be unfortunate if we did not follow these important improvements
> due to lack of consensus.
>
> *2. on the Process*
>
> It was expected that the community discuss, express view and concern
> thereafter the Leadership will do his best effort to build consensus.
> Consensus here is strictly in the sense of RIR practices mean The Rough
> Consensus Model *[1]*.
>
> Ideally, people shall be encourage to comment on the list for the sake of
> archive and off list contribution should be discouraged and not accepted.
>
> That why some members of the community suggested the creation of a
> committee to lead the process.
>
>
> *3. On the discussion.*
>
> Community has expressed views on each points. As expected there were
> convergences and divergences. For example, points 3,4, 5 had active and
> intensive discussions while reading may sound like profound disagreement.
> We shall now entire to the consensus building mode by opening the
> disagreement views and addressing one by one then we'll build ROUGH
> CONSENSUS.
>
> Another example, on point 11, there was no objection, but some suggestions
> even propose more such as "Registered Members only MUST never amend the
> bylaws, ..." and The proposed amendment should be published not less than
> 60 days and not more than 90 days before, with the provisions for more
> members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation
> period"
>
> *4. On the other points.*
>
> Beyond the 12 points, some areas of improvements were suggested.
>
> For example, https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2016-
> June/000350.html lists some of the points
>
> *[1]* https://www.nro.net/about-the-nro/rir-accountability on section 1.4
>
>
> Regards,
> Bope
>
> On 19 September 2016 at 17:03, Andrew Alston  com> wrote:
>
>> I agree with the sentiments as echoed by Boubakar below.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Mike Silber 
>> *Reply-To: *General Discussions of AFRINIC > >
>> *Date: *Monday, 19 September 2016 at 10:39
>> *To: *General Discussions of AFRINIC 
>> *Cc: *"members-disc...@afrinic.net" 
>> *Subject: *Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - bylaws
>> changes
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 18 Sep 2016, at 23:44, Boubakar Barry 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> …
>>
>>
>>
>> We can of course think of advantages we can give to associate members  to
>> acknowledge their commitment and support. But I would not support giving
>> voting rights to associate members. I would rather be for removing this
>> membership category instead.
>>
>>
>>
>> Boubakar +1
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Members-Discuss mailing list
>> members-disc...@afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
>>
>>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders

[Arnaud AMELINA]

we can't solve everything in constitution.  We will need Implementation
guidelines, policies etc... and if there is still residual confusion,
consensus approach shall prevail

Regards

Le 13 juil. 2016 10:25, "Nishal Goburdhan"  a
écrit :
>
> On 13 Jul 2016, at 11:30, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote:
>
>
>
>
>> The consequence of this delay of a year is in bad taste which does not
build trust. Moreover, this delay has also generated on this mailing list
some unpleasant acrobatic interpretations of the section 16.1 of the bylaw,
which understanding is obvious.
>
>
> again, you imply one thing, when the truth is another.  there is rarely
“obvious” understanding, and this discussion should have proven that.
> * there is that, which the text (bylaws) says, and needs to be read
literally
> * there is clearly disagreement on what this written text means to some
> * there is scope for improvement of the text
>
> or, perhaps not?  perhaps it’s literal enough to mean, exactly what it
says?  as a step moving forward, it would be useful, if, those that think
that this text needs to be changed, submit new text  (like some of the
really good proposals that this list has already seen!).
>
>
>
>> Let us wait for the outcome of the board meeting
>
>
> yes indeed, and let us respect, and support the outcome of this decision.
>
> meanwhile, the challenge for new (better) text, still stands.
>
> —n.
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] Strategy Document

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi Mr. CEO

Thanks for sharing this summary of the Strategic Plan.

See comments and questions below.

Now on strategic objectives:

1. “Encourage awareness of IPv6”.

Will AFRINIC be "encouraging IPv6 awareness in 2016-2020" OR  “encourage
IPv6 deployment” ?

Do we really have a strategic plan on IPv6 deployment beyong awareness.?

2. On the “Improve WHOIS accuracy”.

Do we have a strategy on the above too?

We were told during AGMM in Gaborone that the future of AFRINIC is around
“Training” and “Research and Innovation”, however, going through the shared
4 pages strategic plan, I  can't  seem to read that anywhere.

Do you care to clarify further on the above points?

Regards

Arnaud
Le 8 juil. 2016 12:08, "Alan Barrett"  a écrit :

> FYI.  The appended message was sent to the members-discuss list.
>
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: Alan Barrett 
> > Subject: Strategy Document
> > Date: 8 July 2016 at 16:06:10 +0400
> > To: AfriNIC Discuss 
> >
> > Dear Members,
> >
> > The AFRINIC Board has prepared the attached Strategy Document and
> approved it for publication.  This document is a summary of strategic
> objectives and projects planned for the five years from 2016 to 2020.
> >
> > Alan Barrett
> > CEO, AFRINIC
> >
>
> >
> >
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment

[Arnaud AMELINA]

2016-06-29 12:04 GMT+00:00 ALAIN AINA :

>
> Hello,
>
> Other points we may want to consider. See below:
>
> 1- Amend 4.2 to add membership consultation and community notification for
> at least 6 months before applying adopted new fees schedule.
>
> "Fees review must be done in consultation with the members and community
> must be notified at least six(6) months before new adopted fees schedule
> takes effect."
>
> ++ current
> 4.2 The fees mentioned in Article 4.1 above shall be subject to review
> from time to time by the Board.
> ++
>

I support the proposal of Alain. One thing that should not be lost sight
of, the Board was appointed by the community to represent where all
memebres can not be. The board can not under any circumstances take a
decision regarding the community without notice. The board could come to
the community with a proposition and the community can accept or amend.

>
>
> 2- Amend 13.4 to clarify that all directors are elected upon
> recommendations by NOMCOM, while keep the competency requirements for the
> non regional.
>
> + current
> 13.4 The Board shall comprise of nine (9) Directors appointed as follows:
>
> (i) Six Directors elected by the Annual General Member Meeting called
> under Article 11.1 of this Constitution to represent each of the regions
> listed in Article 13.5; (Seats 1 to 6)
>
> (ii) Two Directors elected by the Annual General Member Meeting called
> under Article 11.1 upon the recommendation of the NomCom based on their
> competencies and not their regional representation; and (Seats 7 and 8)
>
> (iii) The Chief Executive Officer. (Seat 9)
> +
>

I support this amendement too.

>
> 3-   Amend  14 to add provisions for director recall by the membership :
>
> - Process starts by petition of minimum 10% of the total membership
> - Challenged director given opportunity to address the community
> - Recall approved by 75% of the votes
>
>  current
> 14 REMOVAL OF DIRECTORS
>
> 14.1 A Director shall hold office until:
>
> (i) his term of office expires, without prejudice to Article 13;
>
> (ii) he/she signs a written notice of resignation and delivers it to the
> address for service on the Company, which notice shall be effective when it
> is received at that address or at such later time as may be specified in
> the notice;
>
> (iii) he/she is removed by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all other
> Directors;
>
> (iv) he/she otherwise ceases to be a Director pursuant to Section 139 of
> the Act; or
>
> (v) the Director being the Chief Executive Officer, on the Board
> terminating his employment as Chief Executive Officer.
> +
>
> I support this proposal, however, I propose the minimum to 20%, which is
reasonable, Afrinic is not a single local association, it is a continental
institution ...

>
> 4-  Amend 12.10 (ii)   to set the quorum at 10% of the total membership
> either present physically or remotely
>
>
> +++ current
> 12.10 Quorum.
>
> (ii) The quorum for an Annual General Member meeting shall be composed of
> minimum of ten (10) members in person comprising:
>
> a) Four (4) Directors elected to represent a region;
>
> b) One (1) Director elected on a non-regional criterion; and
>
> c) Five (5) Resource Members.
> +++
>

I support this proposal, however, I increase the minimum to 20%, which is
reasonable, Afrinic is not a single local association, it is a continental
institution ...

>
> 5- Amend 12.11 to set  minimum number of votes. For all vote, a minimum of
> votes from 10% of the total eligible voters required.
>
>
> I support this proposal, but, I proose 20%, which is reasonable, Afrinic is
not a single local association, it is a continental institution ...

> Cheers
>
> —Alain
>
> Best Regards

Arnaud.

>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 28, 2016, at 5:20 PM, Omo Oaiya  wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10 June 2016 at 11:18, Alan Barrett  wrote:
>
>> Arising from a review of AFRINIC’s Bylaws and other documents, several
>> potential areas for improvement were identified.
>>
>> The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the
>> community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016.
>>
>> I invite the community and the membership to comment on these
>> suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.
>> Comments should be sent to the community-discuss@afrinic.net mailing
>> list.  In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the
>> suggestions (and additional points that might be identified).
>>
>> Alan Barrett
>> CEO, AFRINIC
>>
>>
>
> Thanks Alan.  Comments below
>
>
> >>>1 ..  but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether
>> or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict
>> must be resolved one way or another.
>> We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and
>> modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision
>
>
> Just a matter of ambiguity in 

Re: [Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing

[Arnaud AMELINA]

+1 to Marriam N.
Le 27 juin 2016 12:53, "Mirriam Namwau" <mirriamlau...@yahoo.com> a écrit :

>
> On 27 Jun 2016 13:50, "Alan Barrett" <alan.barr...@afrinic.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On 27 Jun 2016, at 13:40, Arnaud AMELINA <ameln...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear CEO,
> > >
> > > Compared to all the above how can you explain the delay of the 2014
> annual report.
> >
> > I will not attempt to explain the delay, except to say that I am still
> learning the requirements, and we will try to do better in future.
> >
> Thank you for your frank response and the community hopes that the future
> will look different. Please note that this is a requirement for the board
> and "some" board members were there when 2013 report was presented and the
> organization must have memory. We as a community can't afford to remind
> those responsible for their duties especially when reports for 2014 and
> 2015 are not presented or available on line in year 2016.
> Mirriam
> LadiesInTech
> South Sudan
>
>
> ___
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
>
>
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

[Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi AFRINIC community,

After several research and consultations, It appears that the annual report
for 2015 was not presented at AfRINIC meeting in Gaborone as per the bylaws
section 7.6(iii).

http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/bylaws?start=6

Also when one looks at the AFRINIC website, Annual Reports for both 2014
and 2015 are missing. The last report to be posted was for 2013 and this is
2016.

http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/corporate-documents

Can we please know why as this reports are extremely important to the
community as stakeholders.
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

[Community-Discuss] About NRO NC discuss

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Hi community,

I have a question that bothers me since our return from Pointe-Noire. We
had many discussions about the selection of representatives for NRO NC ...
What were the outcomes of those discussions  and what were the terms set
for their term. I do not remember that we got concensus ? Thank you to
whoever wants to answer me .

Best regards

Arnaud
___
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC Update 23rd November 2015

[Arnaud AMELINA]

@Noah

Exactly what are reactions like those that close the mouths of those who
have some courage to intervene. And to you, to avoid these kind of
discouragement, if you have nothing to add to people's comments, do not
disparage it please, thank you.




Justement ce sont des réactions comme celles qui ferment la bouche à ceux
qui ont certains courages pour intervenir. A vous aussi d'éviter de ces
genre de découragement, si vous n'avez rien à ajouter aux commentaires des
gens, ne les dénigrez pas s'il vous plais,  merci.

Regards.

Arnaud

2015-11-24 19:49 GMT+00:00 Noah :

> Some of you ought to remain either silent or as observers..
>
> some of your comments clearly ever add value
>
> We are sick and tired
>
> Noah
> On 24 Nov 2015 22:37, "Owen DeLong"  wrote:
>
>>
>> On Nov 24, 2015, at 04:08 , Badru Ntege 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Owen
>>
>> I think Andrew did make his point very clear and as shocking as it maybe
>> to you I think we had a fact based discussion and to me ended mutually.
>> Actually again to shock you I of all the dialogue I had on this list I
>> think the one with Andrew was clear.
>>
>> What I do not understand is contributions like yours which look for what
>> was not in the email.  I might not agree with Andrew most times but does
>> not mean I cannot dialogue with him.
>>
>>
>> You are the one incorporating things not in the email. I never said you
>> could not dialogue with Andrew and I would never presume to speak for him.
>>
>> I spoke only to what I saw as the facts of the matter and of my opinion
>> as a concerned member of the community.
>>
>>
>> Unless he asked you to help on the mail (which I doubt)  I do not
>> understand why you then write on his behalf
>>
>>
>> Again, I do not believe I did so. I wrote on my behalf as a concerned
>> member of the community who is tired of your repetitive attempts to rewrite
>> history to your own liking.
>>
>> Unfortunately its missguided souls like you that are part of our biggest
>> problem.  One could even go as far as calling  the cancer.
>>
>>
>> An interesting and telling comment.
>>
>> I wonder, could you attack my statements on their merit rather than
>> resorting to ad hominem?
>>
>> Owen
>>
>>
>> Baffled 
>>
>>
>> On 11/23/15, 10:35 PM, "Owen DeLong"  wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Nov 23, 2015, at 03:26 , Badru Ntege 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>> Comments inline
>>
>> On 11/23/15, 2:11 PM, "Andrew Alston" 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Firstly, let me state my apologies for my silence of late, due to
>> circumstances beyond my control I have been largely out of contact for the
>> purposes of AfriNIC business for the better part of 2 months.  It is
>> important to note that the terms of reference require that the audit
>> committee act unanimously, and this could not happen over this period,
>> hence certain delays, which again, I apologise for.
>>
>>
>> Could we be lead to assume that you do not have enough time to serve
>> Afrinic.  We do totally understand that Afrinic is purely voluntary and if
>> your primary assignments have become too demanding, mechanisms of relieving
>> the workload do exist.  I’m sure chair is fully aware of these so we do not
>> have to elaborate.
>>
>>
>> Badru,
>>
>> It’s clear you can be led to assume whatever you wish and that you are
>> clearly attempting to lead the community to assume facts not in evidence.
>>
>> Even the most dedicated volunteers sometimes have things come up which
>> temporarily pull them away from their volunteer duties. Andrew has
>> expressed this in a manner that implies the distraction was temporary in
>> nature and I see no reason to believe otherwise. I’m quite certain that if
>> Andrew faced any sort of permanent inability to fulfill his obligations, he
>> would act accordingly without requiring any form of encouragement from you.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please rest assured that a lot of work has gone in since Tunis into
>> ensuring that the information that is provided to the community is accurate
>> and a fair representation.  I would rather such information was provided
>> slightly delayed than contained inaccuracies or disputed pointed, and as a
>> result, the work has taken a significant amount of time, due to the care
>> and thoroughness applied.
>>
>>
>> The above in a way is in contradiction to your pre-ceeding statement
>> which referred to conflicting priorities.
>>
>>
>> No, it isn’t. Andrew stated that one of the contributing factors to the
>> overall delay has been his inability to work on the matter.
>>
>> This paragraph seems to me to state that there are other factors as well,
>> including the need for extensive work presumably performed by other members
>> of the committee. Further, Andrew stated that his inability to work on the
>> matter only covers the last 2 months (September and October). Since the
>> Tunis