Good Morning Owen, There is something i wanted to ask you about, but please give me a short answer and straight forward:
In your opinion, an organization that is offering bribe to people in order to get their votes, in order to influence the outcome of the elections to her favor in Camaros, - will that organization be trustworthy ? - Will that organization have any right again to lecture about corruption while it is promoting the culture of corruption (allegedly as per above if it is true)? - will you trust any word from that organization? - will you have faith and rely on their intensions that they are upright? I am not pointing any finger at you , rather i am just seeking your opinion pls. On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 7:30 AM Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 16, 2022, at 22:26 , Amin Dayekh <ad...@megamore.ng> wrote: > > I am not replying to this news paper, nor I have time to read it all. > > I will also ask you to remember your statement here, ( the resource holder > are pushing for a transfer policy) i will also prove you wrong! > > > I look forward to your attempt to do so. > > I find it amusing how you have cherry picked what you respond to while > ignoring the most salient points in the prior messages to the point where > when I limit it to the salient points, you choose to ignore the entire > message rather than make a cogent response. > > Owen > > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 4:40 AM Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Jun 15, 2022, at 12:00 , Amin Dayekh <ad...@megamore.ng> wrote: >> >> Owen, >> for the sake of time, I will quote and reply and highlighted in red from >> your ext >> >> *quote: ( Because many resource holders wish to be able to sell their >> underutilized resources in a worldwide secondary market. ) *you used the >> term sell, in another reply you denied selling, anyway whatever the term >> is, this should be governed by the rir, there should be an application with >> the knowledge of the rir and justification of the use, just like when you >> apply to RIR directly, not an unmonitored process. Let me remind us here of >> the difference between inter-rir and LIR to another member. this step was >> taken by many rir "inter rir transfer" who own majority of the IPV4, and to >> regulate the transfers and continue to monitor the ipv4, closing the door >> on black and grey market. let me remind us also that such cases peculiar to >> need and in cases of bankruptcy or whatever reason the company might be >> dissolved. Also let me remind us all the ip resources are assigned "not >> sold" to lir based on NEED, justified need. >> >> >> Neither Larus nor Cloud Innovation is selling resources received from >> AFRINIC… I stated that many other resource holders wish to do so and that >> is one of the reasons that those resource holders are pushing for a >> transfer policy. >> >> This is not inconsistent, it is your inability to differentiate and/or >> your failure to look past your efforts to ascribe the most sinister >> possible motives to every statement I make. >> >> The RIR doesn’t govern anything. The community governs the RIR and the >> RIR is supposed to administer the registry according to the policies set by >> the community and according to its bylaws which are controlled by the >> membership of the RIR. >> >> Perhaps it is this fundamental misunderstanding of who is specifically >> supposed to be empowered in the governance of the internet and as a result >> the RIRs that is driving some of your other misstatements. >> >> For clarity: >> >> ICANN/PTI in its role performing the IANA operates the central registry >> for IPv4 addresses, IPv6 addresses, and ASNs (among other things). It does >> so according to global policies which are set by the RIRs acting in concert >> through the Address Supporting Organization, specifically the ASO AC, which >> is synonymous with the NRO NC. >> >> Each RIR receives resources from the IANA central registry according to >> its justified need and pursuant to those policies mentioned above. >> >> Each RIR distributes those resources to its subscribers (members or not, >> depending on the RIR’s specific policies) according to the policies set in >> the RIR by its community and according to the bylaws of the RIR set by its >> members. >> >> Each RIR is expected to operate within the policies created by its >> membership and according to its bylaws. When an RIR fails to do so, it >> becomes far more dangerous than is expected. >> >> Some RIR subscribers are LIRs (Local Internet Registries). LIRs provide >> address space to their customers (usually for a fee) whether in >> relationship with connectivity services or as a separate product. >> >> Some RIR subscribers are end users and simply use the address space they >> receive from the RIR directly. >> >> Every RIR except AFRINIC has an inter-RIR transfer policy at this point. >> Yes, the recipient needs to show need in the case of an inter-RIR transfer. >> >> There are many different reasons organizations want to be able to engage >> in inter-RIR transfers and I enumerated several of them. You chose to focus >> on a single one because that is the one you hope to be able to twist into >> something sinister. >> >> quote: ( *.... RIPE-NCC should be going after a number of companies who >> are operating in Africa using primarily RIPE-NCC issued space. Note that >> this is not an issue and nobody has ever claimed it to be an issue. This >> allegation that AFRINIC addresses are restricted to Africa is a fiction >> that has only ever been promulgated in the context of AFRINIC and has never >> received serious attention in any other RIR.) *Answer: AfriNIC got the >> smallest portion of ipv4 and it is called AFRICAN etc... enforcing a policy >> "which does not exist as of now" to transfer inter RIR or sell will be >> suicide to the continent's digital future as the world is at the scarcity >> of IPV4, my view. Rather, Auditing the existing delegations and retrieval >> is what is supposed to happen. in the meantime, the companies you are >> referring to are companies of legitimate presence, not ip brokers and have >> ASNs. What is applicable to RIPE or ARIN is not necessarily applicable to >> AfriNIC, they can enforce any policy and afrinic is at liberty to do such, >> with the view of the little ip resources available and the big future of >> Africa. >> >> >> If you are opposed to an inter-RIR transfer policy, then so be it. That >> has little or nothing to do with whether or not existing addresses >> registered to an organization by AFRINIC are allowed to be used outside of >> AFRICA or not. >> >> However, the policy that does exist now clearly does allow AFRINIC >> addresses to be utilized out of region virtually without restriction. A >> plain text reading of section 6 of the bylaws makes this quite clear. A >> plain text reading of the CPM finds only one place where this is >> contradicted and it applies ONLY to addresses issued after the activation >> of the Soft Landing policy. >> >> If you want to conduct legitimate audits, feel free. If you wish to abide >> by the legitimate outcome of those audits when they show legitimate >> utilization according to the CPM, the RSA, and the bylaws, I’ll fully >> support that. However, use out of region does not violate any of the terms >> in any of those documents unless the addresses were issued to the >> organization after the activation of the soft landing policy. >> >> AFRINIC is free to enforce any policy which has been adopted by the >> community and ratified by the board. There is no policy restricting the >> location of utilization of addresses which meets that test at this time. >> >> *quote: (AFRINIC has not won or last any cases yet regarding the >> geographical restriction of IP Utilization. This is more misinformation >> from you.)* I did not make any statement about winning on geographical >> grounds, why are you putting words in my mouth that I did not say? who is >> misinforming now? >> >> >> You stated: "AfriNic acted according to the Bylaw and court, allow me >> here to refresh your memory, if the ipv4 is not restricted to ise in Africa >> then why the proposals for inter RIR transfer and Other proposals from the >> Meeting which are available online? If that is allowed then AfriNic shouod >> have lost all cases. What is happening in Mauritius is an abuse of the >> Judicial System. “ >> >> Your claim is that AFRINIC should have already lost all cases on >> geographic basis if my statement was true. I pointed out that AFRINIC has >> neither lost nor won because the cases that relate to this matter have not >> yet concluded. I did not put words in your mouth, I responded to what you >> actually said. >> >> >> quote : (....soft landing) Soft landing was very good in other rir if you >> really wish to compare, refer to ARIN website and see how soft landing was >> easy. >> >> >> ARIN never passed a soft landing policy and it worked out quite well >> there, IMHO. >> >> However, the only mention I have made regarding soft landing in any of >> these statements is to mention that it is the only policy with geographical >> restrictions on utilization codified in the policy. I’ve also pointed out >> that said policy does not apply to any addresses issued to Cloud Innovation. >> >> >> *quote : ( I have not and will not lie on behalf of any employer or >> client. This statement is an ad hominem attack, is inappropriate to the >> list, and is, frankly, a libelous accusation without evidence.)* did i >> say you? did i point any finger to you? why are you always whining and >> dtrying to get in the center of attention as if the whole world is >> revolving because of you and around you? I said : *Anyone *can convince >> *himself >> with any lie* and convince the minions involved in this issue who have >> been (mislead) and unfortunately (paid to spread lie), did you see you or >> me or owen or amin in this statement? >> >> >> You made the following direct statement in a message sent directly to me >> as well as an open list: >> "Anyone can convince himself with any lie and convince the minions >> involved in this issue who have been (mislead) and unfortunately (paid to >> spread lie)” >> >> In context, it is quite clear you were intending to level this as a >> direct accusation towards me. Your use of weasel words and attempted >> evasions notwithstanding, at least I have the courage to own what I say and >> take responsibility for it. >> >> >> *quote: ( I have not and will not lie on behalf of any employer or >> client. This statement is an ad hominem attack, is inappropriate to the >> list, and is, frankly, a libelous accusation without evidence. ) *Again: >> Did I say you published any video? did I point any finger at you? did I >> mention you? >> >> >> You said: "When someone accuses an organization of corruption, he should >> provide evidence, not just a video, especially if he/she/it and under the >> table corrupting the members to buy Votes.” >> >> You said this in an email directed to me and copied to an open list. >> >> So in effect, yes, you did claim I published a video, you did point a >> finger presumably at me, and by having my name as the target of your email, >> yes, you did mention me for all practical purposes. >> >> My email was about PTA, our legal team communicated with them on their >> website in Pakistan and the Website of the Embassy in Mauritius and through >> a Letter TO THE embassy here, and will send further to the >> embassies/commission/high commission/consulate (if any) in all African >> Region, so may I understand what involved you here? Are you from Pakistan >> or the spokesperson of PTA? >> >> >> In terms of the subsequent emails in this discussion, you put my name in >> the To: field of your email. If you didn’t intend to involve me, why did >> you do so? >> In terms of the original message, you made a public comment about the >> letter being sent on behalf of a “fraudulent and misleading organization”, >> so I felt obliged to point out your own misleading information that you >> have attempted to promulgate in this same forum and with your own misguided >> and misleading video. >> >> I will note, that you did not address the following component of my >> previous message: >> >> You wrote: >> >> If you think the misquotes you sent before are convincing, maybe to your >> good self, but not to me and i did not reply as I usualy say what i want >> and walk, reason being I have no time to waste on endless discussions as >> the 2nd party is very sure is justifying a wrong cause. >> >> >> To which I responded: >> >> What misquote, exactly? Please point to where my quote was in error and >> be specific. >> >> I literally copied and pasted the text of section 6 of the bylaws. >> >> >> You carefully avoided answering this… Is it perhaps because you have no >> answer here? You could not find an actual misquote? >> >> I find three messages into this conversation that this statement: "I have >> no time to waste on endless discussions as the 2nd party is very sure is >> justifying a wrong cause.” >> is truly telling as apparently I am not such a second party and therefore >> perhaps you are admitting by your actions that I do not actually have a >> wrong cause. If so, this is progress. >> >> Owen >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 6:31 PM Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Jun 15, 2022, at 09:22 , Amin Dayekh <ad...@megamore.ng> wrote: >>> >>> Owen, >>> >>> Don’t rush, all in good time. >>> >>> Yes Misleading the public on claims and claims and claims with no single >>> piece of evidence! >>> >>> AfriNic acted according to the Bylaw and court, allow me here to refresh >>> your memory, if the ipv4 is not restricted to ise in Africa then why the >>> proposals for inter RIR transfer and Other proposals from the Meeting which >>> are available online? If that is allowed then AfriNic shouod have lost all >>> cases. What is happening in Mauritius is an abuse of the Judicial System. >>> >>> >>> *Because many resource holders wish to be able to sell their >>>> underutilized resources in a worldwide secondary market.* Other >>>> companies wish to be able to obtain addresses from that same market once >>>> the artificially constrained AFRINIC free pool is exhausted. Because some >>>> companies would prefer to consolidate their global resources from multiple >>>> RIRs to a single contract with a single RIR. There are a variety of reasons >>>> that have absolutely nothing to do with any idea of geographic restriction >>>> on usage. >>> >>> >>> If what you say is true, then RIPE-NCC should be going after a number >>>> of companies who are operating in Africa using primarily RIPE-NCC issued >>>> space. Note that this is not an issue and nobody has ever claimed it to be >>>> an issue. This allegation that AFRINIC addresses are restricted to Africa >>>> is a fiction that has only ever been promulgated in the context of AFRINIC >>>> and has never received serious attention in any other RIR. >>> >>> >>> AFRINIC has not won or last any cases yet regarding the geographical >>> restriction of IP Utilization. This is more misinformation from you. >>> >>> I expect that with regard to that particular issue, AFRINIC will lose, >>> as a plain text reading of the governing documents does not support such aa >>> restriction except in the case of addresses issued after the activation of >>> the soft landing policy. >>> >>> What is happening in Mauritius is a member attempting to defend their >>> rights under the contract they signed against a board that is misconstruing >>> the bylaws and acting outside of its authority. >>> >>> The board has repeatedly lost, though it has achieved a few procedural >>> victories. Despite its victories, the board remains subject to a series of >>> injunctions preventing it from taking any of multiple illegal actions it >>> has attempted, including its attempt to run a rigged election. Most of the >>> cases are still undecided. >>> >>> Anyone can convince himself with any lie and convince the minions >>> involved in this issue who have been (mislead) and unfortunately (paid to >>> spread lie) >>> >>> >>> I have not and will not lie on behalf of any employer or client. This >>> statement is an ad hominem attack, is inappropriate to the list, and is, >>> frankly, a libelous accusation without evidence. >>> >>> When someone accuses an organization of corruption, he should provide >>> evidence, not just a video, especially if he/she/it and under the table >>> corrupting the members to buy Votes. >>> >>> >>> I’ve made no videos, so I can only assume you are referring to someone >>> else here… Perhaps yourself? >>> >>> If you think the misquotes you sent before are convincing, maybe to your >>> good self, but not to me and i did not reply as I usualy say what i want >>> and walk, reason being I have no time to waste on endless discussions as >>> the 2nd party is very sure is justifying a wrong cause. >>> >>> >>> What misquote, exactly? Please point to where my quote was in error and >>> be specific. >>> >>> I literally copied and pasted the text of section 6 of the bylaws. >>> >>> By the way, I did not mention anyone in my email except PTA so which >>> company you are talking about?! >>> >>> >>> I was talking about you and the misinformation contained in your >>> statements. I thought that was clear from the context. >>> >>> Owen >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 5:11 PM Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jun 14, 2022, at 14:32 , Amin Dayekh <ad...@megamore.ng> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear members, >>>> my attention was drawn to another misleading video of known sources who >>>> are taking maliciously all steps against the Members of AfriNIC and >>>> AfriNIC. >>>> >>>> in the Video I noticed a misleading statement about the "Government of >>>> Pakistan" but when i paused and looked at the document it is the Pakistan >>>> tELECOM authority and not the government itself. >>>> >>>> I am writing this post following an email sent to the Pakistan >>>> telecommunication Authority aka PTA, through their website to: >>>> >>>> a- ask, have you really drafted and sent that letter? >>>> b- inquire, on what basis have you sent that letter? have you at least >>>> communicated with AFRINIC TO HEAR THEIR PART OF THE STORY? >>>> c- raise a solid query with regards to their breach of our sovereignty >>>> as an African continent, Regions, Countries, and Nations through the >>>> alleged Letter sent to the government of Mauritius in support of a >>>> fraudulent misleading organization requiring some details on how Africa's >>>> IPV4 addresses ended and are in USE in Pakistan, which, as per the last >>>> time I checked, is not an African country. >>>> >>>> >>>> Misleading? As in the misleading claim that AFRINIC issued addresses >>>> are somehow restricted to use in Africa when nothing in the bylaws, RSA, or >>>> CPM says so? >>>> >>>> You continue to repeat this claim despite repeated clarifications and >>>> corrections on the fallacious nature of the claim. Clearly, you are the one >>>> engaged in a campaign of disinformation. >>>> >>>> Owen >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss@afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss