An update on the AfriNIC situation

Tom Beecher beecher at
Tue Aug 31 02:42:33 UTC 2021

It strikes me that ( without pointing at anyone in particular ) that
there's a bit of absolutism trending in this conversation.

It's possible for many things in this list to be true.

- It's possible that AFRINIC may have been following it's policies
accurately at the time of the initial allocations,and the current
leadership was overstepping their bounds trying to reclaim them.
- It's possible that AFRINIC may NOT have been following it's own policies
at the time of the initial allocations, and the current leadership is
trying to correct those past mistakes.
- It's possible that CI accurately represented information to AFRINIC.
- It's possible that CI did not.
- It's possible that CI has, at all times,been properly in compliance with
AFRNIC policies.
- It's possible that CI has not.
- It's possible that CI may been been following the letter, if not the
spirit of the policies.
- It's possible that AFRINIC was intentionally delaying restoration of the
allocations after the court order.
- It's possible that AFRINIC was a little slow to respond, waiting on
advice from legal counsel before taking action.

I think we could mostly agree that while potentially frustrating ,such
things can and have happened in the past,and can and have been rectified.

However, where I think we ALL should be able to agree is that CI's
garnishment action is exceptionally punitive and out of line.

On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 10:08 PM John Kristoff <jtk at> wrote:

> On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 16:29:48 -0700
> Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog at> wrote:
> > Further, the registries are not engaged in the daily operations of the
> internet.
> Hi Owen,
> Your statement above I have to insist is simply incorrect.  In addition
> to the traditional services that are relied upon in a variety of daily
> operations (e.g. WHOIS, IRR, DNS reverse delegations), the increasingly
> important RPKI TAs/PPs services are of utmost importance in the daily
> operations of an increasing number of networks within and outside their
> region.  They are just a different kind of infrastructure service
> operator than we may be commonly thing of when it comes to network
> operations.
> John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the NANOG mailing list