nanog mailing list archives
Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation
From: Mark Tinka <mark@tinka.africa>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2021 13:37:32 +0200
On 8/31/21 22:28, Sabri Berisha wrote:
It's easy to argue that CI is in full compliance with that since their assignment supports connectivity between users in Africa and their clients' services. In that case, only IP space used outside of Africa not advertised to the internet would be in violation.
AFRINIC's intention with that language is that those IP addresses need to be assigned for use by eyeballs and operations in Africa. Of course, the Internet is a two-way street, but the IP addresses from which the traffic is sourced, in this case, need to be used inside the continent of Africa.
Mark.
Current thread:
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Tom Beecher (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mark Tinka (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Brielle (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Valerie Wittkop (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Brielle (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Tom Beecher (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Randy Bush (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Tom Beecher (Sep 01)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mark Tinka (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mark Tinka (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mark Tinka (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mark Tinka (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Noah (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Owen DeLong via NANOG (Sep 01)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mark Tinka (Sep 01)