AFRINIC election annulled after ICANN writes angry letter to African regional internet registry The Internet Corporation for Assigned Numbers (ICANN) has demanded the African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC) explain why the nomination committee overseeing its board elections suspended voting, or face disciplinary action. AFRINIC allocates and manages IP addresses and autonomous system numbers for 54 countries across …
From past articles on the subject, it seems that yes, that's really what it's all about. There's such a lack of demand within Africa for them that more money can be made selling them in almost any other part of the world, so there's a digital 'scramble for Africa' going on right now. I suspect most of the bodies involved couldn't care less about internet governance, they're just trying to get a favoured candidate in so they can get a bigger piece of the pie.
It's not a lack of demand. It's a lack of funds. ISPs in Africa are often more starved than most other countries for IPV4 space, and it means it's hard for things like local hosting to obtain the blocks they need, with consumers often relegated to horrendous CGNAT setups. But they also have low budgets, so they can't get those addresses in a bidding war. That's one reason why they have their own RIR in the first place. Sadly, if the people running the RIR are willing to sell those outside the region they're supposed to be in, it breaks down just as much.
Normally, the point of graft and corruption is self-enrichment. I'm a bit confused what the point here is?
You've answered your question.
There has been a lot of fraud and corruption at AFRINC, so much it's hard to keep up. The root of the current shenanigans come from a Chinese company which buried AFRINIC in a blizzard of lawsuits that caused the entire board to resign. This company somehow got ~0.5M IPv4 addresses from AFRINIC and sold/rented them in China. That's a violation of AFRINIC policy since AFRINIC-issued IP addresses are meant to be used in Africa. When AFRINIC tried to recover these addresses, the lawsuits started.
It's very likely this Chinese company has been buying and stealing votes for the EGM to get their sock puppets elected to the board. They have a rather obvious incentive to prevent AFRINIC from enforcing its policies and recovering those IP addresses.
So, if China grabbing these IP's. was against policy, when do they come back to Africa? Seems a no-brainer. You steal something, it gets confiscated by the authorities and returned to the owner. Court cases yes, but lawsuits should not be necessary where actual crime is involved
Too bad for the folks in China illegally using the IP's. Perhaps they could get reimbursed via the judge that orders the IP's back?
So, if China grabbing these IP's. was against policy, when do they come back to Africa? Seems a no-brainer. You steal something, it gets confiscated by the authorities and returned to the owner.
In China? When the accuser is a foreigner? And the accused is Chinese?
Recovering those IP addresses will take a long time and huge amounts of litigation.
Theoretically, there is no reason this has to touch a Chinese court. China doesn't control the routing systems. It would be easy for the rest of the world to see that Afrinic has withdrawn the addresses and no longer honor the previous users' routing announcements. It might not happen that way for fear that China would decide to continue using those and we'd get some fracturing of the IP system, but it could be implemented that way.
In theory, by appointing a different RIR, responsibility for the assignment of IP addresses allocated to AFRINIC's territory for global DNS purposes would be handed over to another less dysfunctional body, e.g. RIPE. Of course, this then carries the risk of some nations or bodies refusing to accept that ruling, which then risks splitting the global DNS system into two or more competing registries where the Africa and Indian Ocean block are concerned. DNS fragmentation is nothing new, of course, but it's never occurred on this level before, and there's a risk it could seriously damage Africa's internet useability and could even potentially disrupt global traffic routing depending on the circumstances, so it's not exactly something ICANN would take lightly - the fact they've even suggested this demonstrates their patience is running thin.
Lets just do a little thought experiment here.
You have been appointed to finally get the dysfunctional AFRINC organisation back on its feet.
Do you a) hold a spotless election, by first obtaining from each national ISP organisation, the name of the voter who will be coming to Mauritius in advance. Then only allowing that person to vote for their organisation. 1 person, 1 vote. Therefore, truly getting a good result and getting AFRINC back to at least the first stage of having it's governance back. And ensuring you and your firm come out of the election smelling like roses, and with a massive boost to your credentials.
or b) Take the brown envelope left under your hotel room door. Allow one person with fraudulent "Power of Attorney" documentation, to vote for everyone, including people who happen to be in the room at the time, and cause the whole process to sink back into the mire. AFRINC stays on the floor, ICANN starts talking of getting involved, and the sh&tshow roles on. You and your firm come out looking like idiots, and worse than that corrupt idiots. You can probably expect plenty of work from corrupt dictatorships in the future (profitable, yet prone to be dangerous to personal health - dictators dont tend to be the most stable of people), but zero from people wanting competent, non-corrupt services.
or c) Do b), but when you realise that the cat is well and truly out of the bag, try and shut it down and say your "investigating". You now look incompetent, corrupt, and even worse disloyal. Or in other words, someone who doesnt stay bought. Therefore, you can no longer expect the work of the corrupt dictatorships (they like people who stay bought and paid for), nor the work of people wanting competent, non-corrupt services.
Hmmm.... what to do, what to do???
I recently voted by proxy in the AGM for an apartment building where I own a property. The election rules were quite straightforward - if a person for whom a proxy vote was submitted turns up in person, the proxy vote is cancelled and the in-person vote takes precedence. Surely the same process could have been followed here?
It's a very good thing they didn't use that method this time. The people who showed up in person didn't submit their proxy vote and decide they could go to Mauritius after all. Their proxy vote was fraudulently submitted by other people. In a similar way, people who chose not to go but went to the effort of submitting a real proxy vote ended up with two votes, and since they weren't there, there was no way to verify which one was correct. This was more than a last-minute vote change and it needs to be handled more severely.
The problem with option A, which is probably why they didn't do it, is that it's not easy or cheap to bring a bunch of representatives from small companies in lots of countries in for a vote. Proxy voting has a purpose, and I'd note that you could get the same result with a one representative one vote system. Specifically, some group that stands to benefit and has enough money to arrange bulk flights to Mauritius submits fake documents saying that each one of their passengers is the single accepted representative of one voter in this election. More expensive on them, but still within their capabilities. Remember that these people were submitting fake powers of attorney, which are not minor documents to forge, so they're not trying a small crime here.
At least other RIRs provide for remote participation that includes voting. I do not know if in AFRINIC you need to be present personally to vote.
Regarding "some group" - perhaps it's the organization with the name of "L***s" that is sending unsolicited mails peddling "their" IPv4 addresses.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
