NUMBER RESOURCE SOCIETY (NRS) — PUBLIC NOTICE
They are trying to consolidate power by taking your IPv4 value — right now.
Proposal 2020-GEN-006-D3 marks the entire AFRINIC-managed pool as “Regional”. That is not a label. It is a lock-in mechanism: restrict exit → crush liquidity → discount your asset.
This is not politics.
This is your balance sheet.
When your asset is trapped inside one registry, your exit options disappear. When exit disappears, leverage disappears. When leverage disappears, value disappears.
The Court is still deciding whether a lawful Board exists and whether the Receivership should terminate. Yet a disputed “Board” elected with roughly 90% support has moved to ratify a world-first lock-in mechanism. In a membership body that has been fighting in court for years, a ~90% outcome is not credibility — it is a red flag. NRS has already encountered members who deny they voted while their names appear on the voting register. If proven, this is not a technical issue: it destroys legitimacy.
What they did — and why it matters
They rushed to ratify Proposal 2020-GEN-006-D3, which marks all AFRINIC pool resources as “Regional”. This is the structural step required to trap member-held assets inside the region.
Ask the simplest question: the moment they think they have power, why is their first move to restrict your exit? Not to stabilise AFRINIC. Not to rebuild trust. Not to restore legitimacy. Their first move is to make you dependent — because dependence is control.
Legality: the Board is not seated.
The case before the Court is exactly about whether governance has been lawfully restored. Structural actions taken before lawful seating are attempts to create irreversible facts before judgment.
Receiver authority: A court-appointed Receiver is preservative, not legislative. He stabilises the institution and conducts elections in accordance with the bylaws/constitution. He does not have express authority to permanently alter member asset mobility by ratifying structural policy. Powers of this magnitude are not implied. If there is doubt, directions must be sought from the Court.
Tainted history: This same policy was previously pushed through without a quorate Board, appealed by the community, and set aside during a period when AFRINIC had no valid Board. Reviving it now — during unresolved governance litigation — is escalation.
Second escalation: bylaws change while contempt allegations exist.
A bylaws review process is being initiated while the Receiver is accused of contempt for violating the bylaws in the election.
Sequence matters: break bylaws → face contempt allegations → attempt to rewrite bylaws. That is not reform. It is changing the standard while being judged against it.
Bylaws review call: https://afrinic.net/call-for-volunteers-afrinic-bylaws-review-committee
Real numbers: what lock-in can cost you
Using the same loss rate implied by a /22 losing USD 45,000, the impact scales linearly. If you hold AFRINIC pool resources, this is what “regional lock-in” can look like in your books.
| PREFIX | IPS | ESTIMATED VALUE LOST (USD) |
|---|---|---|
/22 | 1,024 | 45,000 |
/21 | 2,048 | 90,000 |
/20 | 4,096 | 180,000 |
/19 | 8,192 | 360,000 |
/18 | 16,384 | 720,000 |
/17 | 32,768 | 1,440,000 |
/16 | 65,536 | 2,880,000 |
Understanding the Structural Dynamic
The regional lock-in is not an isolated policy move. It reflects a broader structural pattern — where visible legitimacy (elections, formal processes) operates alongside invisible control mechanisms (capital concentration, procedural leverage, structural confinement).
For a deeper examination of how power, legitimacy, and asset mobility intersect in this context, see the extended analysis:
—Lu Heng, CEO of LARUS Limited
This is how consolidation works: take away exit, then take away value.
If you cannot leave, you cannot discipline governance. If you cannot discipline governance, you become subject to permanent administrative discretion. You do not need to guess intent — the sequence reveals it.
Act now — before this becomes irreversible
NRS is preparing coordinated class legal action to protect member rights and business value, including challenging ultra vires acts and preventing structural entrenchment during live litigation. The longer lock-in is treated as “normal,” the harder it is to unwind. becomes permanent.
Every day of delay increases your exposure. Inaction is how lock-in becomes permanent.
