Correcting some misconceptions
A proposal has been put forward by some individuals in the community, but no decisions have been made.
The AFRINIC community's policy development process is open to all. Anybody can propose a policy, but if it fails to find rough consensus in the community then it will not be implemented. AFRINIC as an organisation has not yet assessed the legal or other ramifications of the policy proposal under discussion.
There are a few incorrect or misleading statements in the article.
1. The headline implies that a decision has been made, but actually there is a proposal in the early stages of discussion.
2. The headline says "No more IP addresses for countries that shut down internet access", but the proposal actually talks about "governments" not "countries". Even if the proposal is implemented, which is by no means certain, only government or state-owned entities would be directly affected; non-government entities in such countries would not be targeted.
3. The first paragraph says that the proposal was "put forward by one of the five global IP allocation organizations." That's not true at all. The proposal was not made by AFRINIC as an organisation; it was made by individual members of the community.
4. The third paragraph talks about "refuse to hand over any new IP address to a country". This makes the same mistake as the headline, confusing countries with governments. The fourth paragraph gets this right with "The ban would cover all government-owned entities …”
5. The next AFRINIC public policy meeting is in Nairobi, Kenya, from 29 May to 2 June; not in Botswana.