[zanog-discuss] vote in the upcoming afrinic elections.
paul.wollner at africaoncloud.net
Fri May 28 15:02:11 SAST 2021
Thanks for not getting into personal attacks and I appreciate the discussion.
Just to make my logic simple:
1. IP address are numbers, just as in no one owns “number 9”, claiming in anyway that “number” has ownership is illogical.
2. As you mentioned “cooperate in a self governing system”, such cooperation is not mandatory, it is voluntary, so such cooperation can be withdrawn at any time, into an entire chain, so if a group of ISPs want to withdraw from the current system (and that including IANA), they can, and they have no need to get an IP from IANA, as I said, they are just numbers. Of course then we will see fragmentation of the internet and internet as we know it would cease to function very well since the new system would not necessarily be compatible with the old one, but it is possible and nothing would prevent anyone doing that.
3. In order to maintain such voluntary cooperation, we need to design a system that works efficiently and not over stepping its boundaries so that people will like it and still cooperate.
And I am very glad you ask what change I am proposing:
1. Taking out all resource managing clauses inside RSA and bylaw, all refer to CPM.
2. Restrict and position AFRINIC as registration service only, step away from attempts to manage people’s network.
3. Have competent AFRINIC team understand the policy as is written, not step out of it.
4. Reduce membership fees in this hard time for members by pushing for a better AFRINIC operation efficiency.
---- On Fri, 28 May 2021 13:02:11 +0200 Nishal Goburdhan via zanog-discuss <zanog-discuss at lists.nog.net.za> wrote ----
On 27 May 2021, at 19:27, Paul Wollner wrote:
> Hi Nishal
> I have to disagree with you.
this is why we debate :-)
> It is members’, including all the businesses’ choice to be part of
> AFRINIC member base, empowering AFRINIC.
actually, it is not. in 2004, arin had their regional public policy
discussion meeting in dar es salaam (hi frank!) and i asked a similar
question. and i got a reply from arin, and the ripe-ncc (and not
afrinic) indicating how they would be dealing with allocations post
formation of afrinic. i am afraid you won’t like the answer :-)
> If a large percentage of the membership disagree with AFRINIC, and
> setup XNIC and run its own database, they entirely can.
and i want to believe that i am young and beautiful. but the world says
(and operates) otherwise.
anyway, the anarchist in me is curious; break down XNIC for us please.
at base, you’d need a source for addresses, and given that the
addresses that you have now are *leased* from afrinic, you’d have to
return these. to get supply from an IANA you’d need to subscribe to
an ICP-2-type  document, and, frankly, i’m curious as to how you
see that happening.
> No law in the world forces you to recognise AFRINIC, or any RIR for
> that matter’s database as the only athletic database of the
> internet. The decentralised nature of the internet allow any part of
> it to leave or join at anytime.
> So if enough members of RIR system choose a different system, and
> choose to refuse to recognise the RIR system tomorrow, they have the
> rights to do so and no law in any country prevent that.
just like how you can run your mail server on tcp:80. we have already
seen how that played out; see my comment about the ALT-ROOTs from
it isn’t about law, paul; it’s about agreeing to co-operate in a
self-governing system. that is what keeps the internet moving and
growing. if you want to talk about introducing law, then, many things
change, and not necessarily for the better. i engage with enough
policy-makers to know that if we simply let them loose on the internet,
that’s not going to end up in an outcome that serves either party
well. believe me when i say, i speak with abject frustration here.
> The cooperation of business to AFRINIC’s registration database are
> entirely VOLUNTARY, and by its nature, it is the members that empower
> AFRINIC, not the other way around.
paul, i’m not sure why you think this works in this manner.
it really doesn’t, and i fear it is going to take more than just a
quick reply to a mailing list to explain this.
perhaps the ZANOG adming team can setup some tutorial to help educate
> No body “own” those “integers”, let alone “let African
> network gets their own address space”.
yes, they are leased. we know this :-)
[snip a lot of spurious rhetoric]
> Your very argument claim they still have free space.
i made no such claim. i simply want to correct the misrepresentation of
how the INR system works. because you might *want* it to work in a
particular manner, does not mean that this is how it operates.
> And I am here try to save the organisation before it collapses, and
> make sure future distribution of space will be effective, members have
> freedom to manage their space, and with a functioning open transparent
i can respect the desire to do good. so, as ben has already asked, how
do you see yourself accomplishing this?
ie. what changes are you proposing? i should add that i am vaguely
worried that someone who is proposing an alternate XNIC type system
wants to be on the board of an existing NIC, but, i’m ever-hopeful (hi
andrew!) that i misinterpreted what you wrote.
regardless, good luck to you, mark, and vika.
 for the casual reader, ICP-2 is the document that defines the
criteria for a new RIR. see
zanog-discuss mailing list
mailto:zanog-discuss at lists.nog.net.za
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the zanog-discuss