Bryan, Legal dispute discussions are prohibited by NANOG’s AUP. Please help us keep this stuff out of the NANOG stream
-mel via cell > On Aug 27, 2021, at 1:10 PM, Bryan Fields <br...@bryanfields.net> wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > > People, can we at least quote properly? I can't follow this at all. > > I wish ARIN would stay out of this, it's not something that affects the ARIN > region, and nothing said in this statement seems to refute any of the > allegations against AFRINIC. What it does seem to do is state Lu Heng/Cloud > Innovation is a shady guy. While this may be true, I'd expect a RIR to treat > everyone the same, and that's the core of the legal complaint here. I'd > expect that for a court to freeze assets of AFRINIC there must be a very > strong argument. > > >> On 8/27/21 2:23 PM, John Curran wrote: >> On 27 Aug 2021, at 12:50 PM, Owen DeLong via NANOG >> <nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> wrote: >> >> There are two sides to every story… >> >> On Fri, 27 Aug 2021 at 09:44, Lu Heng >> > <<mailto:h...@anytimechinese.com>h<mailto:jcur...@arin.net>.l...@anytimechinese.com<mailto:l...@anytimechinese.com>> >> wrote: >> >> Dear John: >> >> The statements you made are very misleading. >> >> Here are some clarifications: >> >> Cloud Innovation is disputing AFRINIC’s claim that Cloud Innovation is in >> breach of the agreement. Cloud Innovation maintains that we are a compliant >> member. >> >> 1. While I make no comment regarding the justification of our resources. we >> have rights just like any other registrant to keep our justification >> material confidential. We would like to share some public data here: Cloud >> innovation accounts for 80% of all AFRINIC whois updates in 2021 to date >> and in AFRINIC whois, over 10 million (roughly 10% of all AFRINIC space) >> IP addresses whois information has not been updated in more than 10 years. >> 40million (roughly 40%) IP addresses have not been updated in more than 5 >> years. Have all of them been required to provide re-justification while >> they don’t bother to update whois? 313 out of 1800 members have not made a >> single assignment in their allocations more than a year after receiving. >> 641 member registered show less than 50% utilization, while AFRINIC’s CPM >> 5.5.1.9 requires at least 50% utilization. All of those member are in >> violation, including several major telecoms. However according to one press >> we saw, AFRINIC only audited 15 member and terminated 5 of them, Cloud >> Innovation being the most compliant member in terms of whois update and >> utilization data provided to AFRINIC as data shows above. >> >> Mr. Lu and/or Owen - It is so nice to hear from you elaborate on your >> extensive righteous behavior. Perhaps you’ll indulge us a simple yes/no >> question? >> >> AFRINIC’s RSA contains the following statement - >> >> (The Applicant Acknowledges…) that it is bestowed with an exclusive right >> of use of those number resources within the ambit of the “need” which it >> has justified in its application and for no other purpose during the >> currency of the present agreement; >> >> Is Cloud Innovation’s use of the blocks in question within the remit and >> purpose for which they were originally justified? >> >> 2. I did go to ARIN for resource, ARIN requested customer personal >> information down to street names, personal address, all of which we do not >> collect in our business from end users due to data privacy concerns. I have >> mentioned in one of ARIN’s meeting and received a consistent answer that it >> must be provided before the resources can be allocated. While I later >> understood it is part of ARIN policy, I still believe that it is an unwise >> policy which puts ARIN in possession of a large collection of personally >> identifying information (PII). So abandoning our ARIN application for >> resources after RIPE ran out, was a legitimate business decision and IMHO, >> a morally correct one made in order to protect the privacy of our >> customer’s. John's statement is misleading at best. John himself has >> repeatedly stated that ARIN does not deny requests, but that applicant’s >> often abandon requests when they are unwilling or unable to provide the >> requested data. That’s exactly what happened here. Contrary to John’s >> claim, that ARIN refused the application in question, the actual facts of >> the matter are that Outside Heaven chose to abandon its request rather than >> compromise the confidentiality of its customers and trust ARIN with such a >> significant amount of customer PII. >> >> You made an application, provided inconsistent data, and then did not >> respond when asked provide sufficient details to satisfy reasonable due >> diligence. After not hearing back after repeated requests, ARIN denied >> the request. >> >> If you prefer to characterize it as “abandoning your application” then that >> is fine. It is consistent with everything I stated, including that ARIN >> ultimately denied your request – and that such abandonment was in the face >> of queries for additional information to clarify the inconsistencies in >> your request. We are generally able to get past these situations with the >> vast majority of organizations with legitimate need for the address space >> per ARIN policy, but I also acknowledge we cannot know how many of those >> who did abandon were for non-qualification versus other reasons. >> >> 5. Unless ARIN admits it has been given the justification submitted to >> AFRINIC by Cloud Innovation in past years, we don't think it is within >> ARIN’s mandate to comment whether it is being used for the same purpose or >> not. John, please clarify, have you received the justification material >> we submitted to AFRINIC? Do you have any inside knowledge about it? We >> would be very keen to know if AFRINIC has disclosed our private data to a >> third party in this process in violation of the very agreement they >> (unjustly) accuse us of breaching. >> >> I have no opinion regarding the justification submitted by Cloud >> Innovation’s for number resources from AFRINIC, and have not seen it. >> >> I _have_ asked a simple question of whether Cloud Innovation’s usage is >> within the remit and purpose for which they were originally justified, and >> I observe that this question has been asked repeated by many others in the >> AFRINIC community. >> >> This question does seem relevant to the dispute so please don’t be >> surprised if you are asked it quite often until such is resolved... >> >> Again – Is Cloud Innovation’s use of the blocks in question within the >> remit and purpose for which they were originally justified? >> >> 6. We find your discussion of the RIR stability fund most interesting… >> Please correct us if we misunderstand, but our understanding is that the >> fund requires the unanimous consent of all 5 RIR CEOs in order to be >> utilized. As such, it appears you are attempting to mislead the community >> by making a 20% promise as if it were a 100% assurance. >> >> My statement reads - >> >> If AFRINIC requests support in accordance with the Joint RIR Stability >> Fund, ARIN will support such a request. Furthermore, and without >> reservation, ARIN stands by its unwavering commitment to support AFRINIC >> and will take any and all measures necessary to ensure that neither the >> African networking community, nor the global Internet number registry >> system, is operationally impacted during this period. AFRINIC was formed >> (and has accomplished so much) for the benefit of the African networking >> community and ARIN stands with the community in dealing with those who seek >> to disrupt or exploit it for their own benefit. >> >> It’s fairly self-explanatory and of course pertains simply to ARIN’s >> support for AFRINIC during this period. If you did not take that away from >> your reading, hopefully that is now clear. >> >> For the above reasons, we think that Mr. Curran has not provided a balanced >> or fully accurate representation of the facts to the ARIN community here >> and we hope that the above clarification will help members of the community >> come to a more fully informed opinion. >> >> A vigorous discourse is a wonderful thing - I actually welcome your >> clarifications as noted above (e.g. you prefer to characterize your ARIN >> request as “abandoned” rather than it having been denied) >> >> You apparently can clarify quite a bit when it suits you, but still fail to >> respond to the most basic yes/no question - Is Cloud Innovation’s use of >> the blocks in question within the remit and purpose for which they were >> originally justified? >> >> Finally, while we realize that this is inappropriate for PPML, as it does >> not really touch on any ARIN policy discussion, we believe that Mr. >> Curran’s post could not be allowed to stand without rebuttal. Since he >> chose to make such a non-policy post to PPML, we felt that our posting of >> the rebuttal here was justified. >> >> Unless Mr. Curran or other ARIN staff member(s) choose to further engage on >> this topic here, this will be our only post on the matter to this list. We >> would also welcome the opportunity to take the discussion to a more >> appropriate ARIN list if Mr. Curran prefers that alternative. >> >> Excellent point. I have taken the liberty of replying to Owen’s post here >> on nanog for clarity, but also suggest we continue this on arin-ppml so as >> to spare the NANOG community. >> >> Best wishes, /John >> >> John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers >> >> >> >> > > > - -- > Bryan Fields > > 727-409-1194 - Voice > http://bryanfields.net > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEaESdNosUjpjcN/JhYTmgYVLGkUAFAmEpRgwACgkQYTmgYVLG > kUAhLg/7B82+gbK4YjMwENBKIoL+53vB/H5DVo4WFHmDekadrsD8NkD39MxYARfZ > vfe4uQqKCEx5Oo1Cefh9oY9G9mAhVC0244afbIqGU7RH06WSWFOA5Xj7//dUvTgH > Tqd+A1ehGop/LpJlKJhFBOj5hMc9AgXNXPadeXAlx0LEsgp0Q1K7PFjCu+6+q9Ed > LMT9Yu5FNDlsvEq/+ErnHcoRRdHx/cESPpswnt5neb4Sjg8mBldglA/1VwGx4LGu > lzAWapp0Jbn9F5G/9SuI6UowCu08Gk+zaVmu31Z2fs3PRpa3KniOTnNDF7MHgT33 > CK/awTaiNIPOJaK0ktXtBQmlwEfR4tkWHi15SdwvEBDX3y3OEfIdKc5Cm9DhoJhW > 6JTlNFWmplL2HZpdIWiEVCu++21xsMEpJKeMPcfpVsxPkxAHdbikSQ0zK+8pBTye > pehHaYqnhDbX2jER//+sfJ1cezrsXg+dZ0deNvB7HjrdnWvdKitpzv09Ap24iwzq > u0wdEsuVn6bQT8LcSbXAigssaTyCOp84G2JlRpZ85/iAsQXawpEAn1ACBHi0tbXS > RQ8ddRiINnJ1kzP3xqxVIBvlfo1PzQjXNwoOn5fE5w/qyuI78IyKHkWad6AyEuyB > kEZdDl3VDcCRe4wdt8CQOxgiJfG0AkyPBipfJFdSy08ujZwpUIU= > =Ohbp > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
