nanog mailing list archives
Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership
From: Rubens Kuhl <rubensk () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 20:26:28 -0300
CI didn’t sue AFRINIC for nothing. AFRINIC, in violation of the actual text of their bylaws attempted to revoke CI space and created major disruptions to a number of networks in the process. Had CI not received the injunctions they got from the courts, likely the disruption would have been much worse and caused some pretty wide-spread outages.
If a car is stolen and then used to provide ride sharing services, when the repo man comes along, it will cause disruption to those ride sharing services. Rubens
Current thread:
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership, (continued)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership John Curran (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership Noah (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership John Curran (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership Collider (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership John Curran (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership Niels Bakker (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership Steve Sullivan (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership Delong.com via NANOG (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership Rubens Kuhl (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership Eric Kuhnke (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership Eric Kuhnke (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership Delong.com via NANOG (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership Eric Kuhnke (Sep 15)
- Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership Pascal Masha (Sep 16)
- Re: Legal system as a weapon (was Re: AFRINIC placed in receivership) Jay R. Ashworth (Sep 29)