RIR's system before AFRINIC

RIRs before AFRINIC



The case AFRINIC and evolution of the Global RIR system

By Adeola A. P. AINA
May, 7. 2024

In a recent publication “AFRINIC’s Journey retold" (Adeola AINA, 2022), a detailed chronological evolution of AFRINIC since its inception until the end of 2022 was provided. The origin of the ongoing legal dispute saga, unfolding under Mauritius jurisdiction, was addressed. Through a blog ‘AFRINIC and the Stability of the Internet Number Registry System” ARIN’s CEO provided valuable insights into the AFRINIC legal litigation (John Curran, 2021). He reiterated concerns about the stability of the global RIR system and how it is prepared to deal with the situation.

How prepared was the Global RIR system?

When AFRINIC celebrated its 10th anniversary (AFRINIC, 2015), Vint Cerf pointed out the importance of AFRINIC: "...I found it phenomenally satisfying to urge and encourage my African colleagues and other interested parties to find a way to make common cause regarding Internet address space management. This raw material is the stuff of which the Internet is made. The creation of AFRINIC, itself, is a most important event in Africa’s Internet history. It showed that a diverse continent could achieve a common goal by aligning their mutual interests. Having achieved that goal, AFRINIC’s creation was and is a concrete demonstration that African states have the capacity to cooperate and collaborate...", and Dr Nii Quaynor warned the community: “It took the elders a decade to build consensus for forming AfriNIC, it has taken the developers a decade to establish AfriNIC. We must have a strong AfriNIC community before the end of the next decade.”

It should be remembered that in 2015, as part of their role in the IANA Stewardship Transition, each RIR completed a review of its governance policies and procedures with a special focus on assessing the viability of their multi-stakeholder governance and policymaking mechanisms, to assess the risk of capture (The Number Resource Organization, 2018) , i.e. whether one constituency could gain unwarranted control over an RIR’s governance and policymaking.

In the case of AFRINIC, the accountability assessment identified several areas where minor improvements or clarifications could be made to AFRINIC’s Bylaws or Constitution. These areas include the rights of different classes of members, independence of Directors, the process for electing Directors, the process for changing the Bylaws or Constitution, and the process for changing number resource policy. As a result, amendments to the constitution were initiated (AFRINIC, 2016).
In November 2016, out of the 20 proposed amendments through Special resolutions, 11 failed to gain the required 75% votes of the 79 members who voted (Alan Barrett, 2016). By the end of 2016, AFRINIC had 1078 members.

Among the 11 resolutions which failed, it is worth noting the followings:

  • SR 4: State that Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole, regardless of their regional affiliation.
  • SR 6: Introduce term limits for Directors.
  • SR 7: Limit the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation or reside in the same region.
  • SR 11: Remove the ability for the Board to disapprove nominations for Board elections.
  • SR 16: Give the Members the power to recall a director.

    • It was evident that the objectives of the reform, aimed at strengthening the governance and protecting against capture, were not achieved. The message did not go through, or the worm was the fruit.

    In 2020, amidst the crisis, an attempt to amend the bylaws met a similar fate. Out of 28 proposed Special resolutions, only 14 passed (AFRINIC, 2020).

    In other regions, there were review and amendments to the bylaws. Links to the bylaws of the 5 RIRs are available on The Number Resource Organization website (2022).

    The most recent AFRINIC’s customer satisfaction survey report by DCDM Research was in 2019 (DCDM Research, 2019). The survey summary indicates:

    Overall satisfaction and loyalty

    “Members are very satisfied and loyal to the organization, both scores have increased compared to 2012 and now stands at 80 and 81 respectively. AFRINIC members are also very loyal to the organization with 52% actively willing to promote the company to others.”

    KEY DRIVER PROCESS EVALUATION

    “Members feel the Board of Directors do not represent their companies’ interest; however, it is worth noting that 20% are not aware of the Board of Directors activities, they are also not satisfied with the voting structure.”

    As recalled in (John Curran 2021), from the results of 2015 accountability assessment, it appeared useful to establish a Joint RIR Stability Fund as a prudent contingency measure towards long-term Internet number registry stability. (The Number Resource Organization, 2022) .

    In the RIR accountability Q&A on NRO’s website (The Number Resource Organization, 2018), the question “Who can withdraw an RIR’s authority?” is answered as follows:

    RFC 7020: The Internet Numbers Registry System, published in 2013 notes that further evolution of the Internet Numbers Registry System will occur via open, transparent, and bottom-up decision-making processes, and that specifically:

    “Discussions regarding the evolution of the Internet Numbers Registry System structure, policy, and processes are to take place within the ICANN framework and will respect ICANN’s core values … [that] encourage broad, informed participation reflecting the functional, geographic, and cultural diversity of the Internet at all levels of policy development and decision making, as well as the delegation of coordination functions and recognition of the policy roles of other responsible entities that reflect the interests of affected parties… The discussions regarding Internet Numbers Registry evolution must also continue to consider the overall Internet address architecture and technical goals referenced in this document.” As in the case of recognizing a new RIR, withdrawal of authority or closure of an RIR would require the consensus agreement of thecommunity, expressed via a global policy as described in the ICANN Address Supporting Organization (ASO). Memorandum of Understanding.”(ICANN, 2019)


    The stage was set, the RIR system was warned and prepared to deal with contingencies. Signs of possible disputes between RIR and their members due to IPv4 misappropriation, as well as disputes on the role and responsibilities of the RIRs, were visible since the beginning of the exhaustion of IPv4.

    And so …?
    It so happened that the dispute between AFRINIC and his member did not resolve within AFRINIC, its community and ended up in court. Unfortunately, rather than addressing the AFRINIC's ability and rights to recall the allocated resources, the dispute turned to a survival battle, to which AFRINIC and the community responded appropriately. Some interpreted this as a demonstration of force and powers to intimidate AFRINIC which went wrong. AFRINIC did not negotiate or compromise under these conditions.

    There were attempts to paralyse the registry even though the consequences could have affected the resources held by the complainant.

    The youngest RIR is attacked, and attempts on others have been observed. Lessons have been learned, prompting other RIRs to adjust their governance and reinforce their safeguards accordingly.

    AFRINIC core services continue to operate except the PDP, despite the unpredictable nature of the future, which hinges on decisions from Mauritius court and the reactions of the involved parties.


    Which exit strategy?

    The whole continent is awake on the case. The global RIR community is not left out. Recently, NRO EC sought the ASO AC’s assistance with two tasks that should help strengthen the RIR system (John Curran, 2023) considering AFRINIC’s case:

    1- ICP-2 Implementation Procedures
    2- Strengthening ICP-2

    A draft of ICP-2 Implementation Procedures was submitted for review by the ASO AC (Oscar A. Robles-Garay, 2024), to which it responded with some legitimate comments and recommendations (Herve Clement, 2024). The document includes implementation and assessment procedures for ICP-2 procedures. It set conditions for subject RIR review by ICANN of reviewing RIRs and actions to be taken when subject RIR is found non-compliant.

    This effort is commendable and requires attention, but its reference to AFRINIC’s case as sole driver might be questionable. Have we done a thorough analysis of what did not work?

    Did we lack an early alarm system, or did we miss the alerts? Data make believe it’s the latter. Without clear requirements (“DOs” and “DON’Ts), indicators and measures, the parties appeared to not know what to hold on to, their obligations and responsibilities. We might also have underrated the magnitude of the impact of the threat.

    With the coordinated level seen in the “Detect and Respond”, would the “Recover and Reconstitute” be too hard? Time has passed.Things have settled, lot of water has flowed under the bridges, and it is clearer that Africa cannot afford to lose its number’s registry in the critical phase of connecting the unconnected and offering meaningful connectivity to all.

    How to reconstitute AFRINIC for all?
    How to conciliate the diverging interests?
    How to separate and limit impact of policy and governance on operations?
    Which safeguards?

    The lessons learnt could help define a new Internet Coordination Policy for number registries with improved stewardship, better accountability, and clear indicators.

    Any work around this, will have to address the issue of the legitimacy of the RIRs, and design the number resources management for the future. Such work will benefit from clarifying few points like What makes a stakeholder?, who is a stakeholder? and the membership versus Community.


    References
    1. Adeola A. AINA, (2022, December 8). AFRINIC’s Journey retold. Retrieved from https://www.digitalintelligence.africa/publications/alain/AFRINIC-Journey-EN.html
    2. John Curran, (2021, August 27). Afrinic and the stability of the Internet Number Registry System. Retrieved from https://www.arin.net/blog/2021/08/27/afrinic-and-the-stability-of-the-internet-number-registry-system
    3. AFRINIC, (2015, September 30). AFRINIC 10 Years Anniversary Celebration, Page 4&6. Retrieved from https://afrinic.net/10-years-celebration
    4. The Number Resource Organization, (2018, June 26). RIR Accountability Assessment Reports. Retrieved from https://www.nro.net/accountability/rir-accountability/regional-internet-registry-accountability-assessment-reports/
    5. AFRINIC, (2016, November 30). Draft Minutes of AFRINIC Special General Members' Meeting. Retrieved from https://afrinic.net/ast/pdf/agmm/2017/20161130_draft_minutes_sgmm2016.pdf
    6. Alan Barrett, (2016, November 30). [AFRINIC-Announce] Results of voting on special resolutions. Retrieved from https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/announce/2016/001715.html
    7. AFRINIC, (2020, September 18). Draft Minutes of AFRINIC Annual General Members’ Meeting. Retrieved from https://afrinic.net/ast/pdf/agmm/2020/afrinic-agmm-2020-min-draft.pdf
    8. The Number Resource Organization, (2022, December 28). RIR Governance Matrix. Retrieved from https://www.nro.net/accountability/rir-accountability/rir-governance-matrix/#rirbylaws
    9. DCDM Research, (2019, March). AFRINIC Customer Satisfaction Survey. Retrieved from https://afrinic.net/ast/afrinic-survey-customer-satisfaction-report-20190710-en.pdf
    10. The Number Resource Organization, (2022, November 8). Joint RIR Stability Fund. Retrieved from https://www.nro.net/accountability/rir-accountability/joint-rir-stability-fund/
    11. The Number Resource Organization, (2018, July 31). RIR Accountability Q&A. Retrieved from from https://www.nro.net/accountability/rir-accountability/q-and-a/#13
    12. John Curran, (2023, October 26). [AC-DISCUSS] Request for ASO AC's Assistance in Preparing ICP-2 Implementation Procedures and in Updating ICP-2 to Provide a Stronger RIR Framework. Retrieved from https://aso-apps-2.ripe.net/hyperkitty/list/ac-discuss@aso.icann.org/thread/GBMO6DIIZPYT3U7PLUWGLYQJRHD35T46/
    13. Oscar A. Robles-Garay, (2024, January 24). [AC-DISCUSS] Re: Request for ASO AC's Assistance in Preparing ICP-2 Implementation Procedures and in Updating ICP-2 to Provide a Stronger RIR Framework. Retrieved from https://aso-apps-2.ripe.net/hyperkitty/list/ac-discuss@aso.icann.org/message/HHUUBSHI3J2LC466LU3XTVGTWBPMEZMN/
    14. Herve Clement, (2024, February 8). [AC-DISCUSS] Re: Request for ASO AC's Assistance in Preparing ICP-2 Implementation Procedures and in Updating ICP-2 to Provide a Stronger RIR Framework. Retrieved from https://aso-apps-2.ripe.net/hyperkitty/list/ac-discuss@aso.icann.org/message/IVG6PM6PG5TZJVVIXACPN6VK67LRVNNB/
    15. ICANN, (1999). ICANN – ASO MoU (1999). Retrieved from https://aso.icann.org/documents/historical-documents/memorandum-of-understanding-1999/
    16. ICANN, (2004, October 21). ICANN – ASO MoU (2004). Retrieved from https://aso.icann.org/documents/historical-documents/memorandum-of-understanding
    17. ICANN, (2019, November 7). ICANN Address Supporting Organisation(ASO) MoU. Retrieved from https://aso.icann.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ASO-MoU-Executed-Nov-7-2019.pdf