From ernest at afrinic.net Thu Jan 20 09:26:19 2005 From: ernest at afrinic.net (Ernest Byaruhanga) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:09 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] moving mailing lists Message-ID: <41EF5D1B.9060109@afrinic.org> Hello, This is to inform you that all lists on afrinic.org have been moved to afrinic.net. Affected lists are afrinic-discuss@afrinic.net and policy-wg@afrinic.net More info: http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi Kind Regards, Ernest. From ernest at afrinic.net Thu Feb 17 23:25:33 2005 From: ernest at afrinic.net (Ernest) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:09 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Delivery service mail Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/policy-wg/attachments/20050218/6f5571f3/attachment.htm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: siupd02.com Type: application/octet-stream Size: 18855 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/policy-wg/attachments/20050218/6f5571f3/siupd02.obj From aalain at trstech.net Sat Apr 16 17:05:21 2005 From: aalain at trstech.net (AINA ALAIN PATRICK(TRS)) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:09 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Guidelines for Temporary Assignments/Allocations's proposal Message-ID: <200504161505.21885.aalain@trstech.net> --------------------------------------------------- Name: ?Alain P. Aina Organisation: TRS Technology Country: Togo Policy Afected: New Date: 16.04.2005 Proposal: Temporary IP allocation in AfriNIC region. --------------------------------------------------- Guidelines for Temporary Assignments/Allocations: ================================================= 1.0 Introduction: ----------------- In some circumstances, organisations may require IP resources for a certain period of time, usually one month and less. This could be for exhibitions, conferences, conventions, etc. AfriNIC will therefore assign numbering resources to entities requiring temporary IP numbers for a fixed period of time. In this document, "IP resources" refers to unicast IPv4/v6 addresses and AS numbers. 2.0 Documenting the temporary activity: -------------------------------------- The activity requiring temporary IP resources should be publicly documented and available, preferably on a website. Entities requiring such IP resources are expected to demonstrate an understanding that when the activity or experiment for which they require the IP resources ends, the IP resources will be returned to AfriNIC. A "publicly accessible document" is a document that is publicly and openly available free of charge and free of any constraints of disclosure. AfriNIC will not recognize any activity under this policy if such an activity cannot be publicly disclosed. 3.0 Assignments of IP resources ------------------------------ Resources are assigned on a lease basis for a period of one month. The assignment can be renewed on application to AfriNIC providing the necessary information . The size of the assigned IP resource will be determined from the plan submitted by the requesting entity. 3.1 Required Documentation: The requesting organisation should send an e-mail to hostmaster@afrinic.net with the following contents: a. Details of Organisation: - Legal Organisation name - Country Where Registered - Postal Address - Physical Address - Telephone and Fax Numbers - website (this is a must) b. Details of activity requiring the temporary assignment. - Website detailing the activity - Website with a link to similar prevsious activities - Links from other (relevant) sites about this activity - Any other information that AfriNIC should know about - Date when the above activity ends. c. The planned use of these IP resources - List subnet size required, and for what it will be used - Any AS numbers. - Reverse delegation, if required d. The intended date of return of the IP resources above. Once the above information has been reviewed by AfriNIC, the requesting entity will be required to fill the appropriate resource-request form and submit to hostmaster@afrinic.net 3.2 Commercial Use Prohibited If there is any evidence that the temporary resource is being used for commercial purposes, or is being used for any activities not documented in the original description provided above, AfriNIC reserves the right to immediately withdraw the resource and reassign it to the free pool. 4.0 Administrative fees to AfriNIC ---------------------------------- AfriNIC may charge administrative fees (if necessary) for assignment of the temporary IP numbers above. ============================================ Incentive: In Africa Internet is still a growing technology and time by time there are high level trainings and event related to Internet awareness. In most of the case the local hosting organisation do not have enough IP address to provide to the workshop Infrastructure, resulting to intensives NAT usage. To avoid this, AfriNIC should be able to provide temporary address space under some specific conditions. This policy will allow AfriNIC to do that. --alain From dioplamine at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 17:11:58 2005 From: dioplamine at yahoo.com (Lamine DIOP) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:09 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Guidelines for Temporary Assignments/Allocations's proposal In-Reply-To: <200504161505.21885.aalain@trstech.net> Message-ID: <20050416151158.37870.qmail@web50105.mail.yahoo.com> Hello Alain, i just suggested that we extend the period for this temporary assignment to 3 months. We should take into account : 1- The time to instruct the demand and to issue the IP address 2- Time to be really sure about the event in itself 3- Time for the send a request to the Telco or the ISP for routing 4- Time to configure and to be sure that the routing issues are solved in the Telco or the ISP network 5- Testing period 6- The event in itself I did not see these items covered in our environment in one month. Please reconsider the period. Regards Mouhamet Diop "AINA ALAIN PATRICK(TRS)" wrote: --------------------------------------------------- Name: Alain P. Aina Organisation: TRS Technology Country: Togo Policy Afected: New Date: 16.04.2005 Proposal: Temporary IP allocation in AfriNIC region. --------------------------------------------------- Guidelines for Temporary Assignments/Allocations: ================================================= 1.0 Introduction: ----------------- In some circumstances, organisations may require IP resources for a certain period of time, usually one month and less. This could be for exhibitions, conferences, conventions, etc. AfriNIC will therefore assign numbering resources to entities requiring temporary IP numbers for a fixed period of time. In this document, "IP resources" refers to unicast IPv4/v6 addresses and AS numbers. 2.0 Documenting the temporary activity: -------------------------------------- The activity requiring temporary IP resources should be publicly documented and available, preferably on a website. Entities requiring such IP resources are expected to demonstrate an understanding that when the activity or experiment for which they require the IP resources ends, the IP resources will be returned to AfriNIC. A "publicly accessible document" is a document that is publicly and openly available free of charge and free of any constraints of disclosure. AfriNIC will not recognize any activity under this policy if such an activity cannot be publicly disclosed. 3.0 Assignments of IP resources ------------------------------ Resources are assigned on a lease basis for a period of one month. The assignment can be renewed on application to AfriNIC providing the necessary information . The size of the assigned IP resource will be determined from the plan submitted by the requesting entity. 3.1 Required Documentation: The requesting organisation should send an e-mail to hostmaster@afrinic.net with the following contents: a. Details of Organisation: - Legal Organisation name - Country Where Registered - Postal Address - Physical Address - Telephone and Fax Numbers - website (this is a must) b. Details of activity requiring the temporary assignment. - Website detailing the activity - Website with a link to similar prevsious activities - Links from other (relevant) sites about this activity - Any other information that AfriNIC should know about - Date when the above activity ends. c. The planned use of these IP resources - List subnet size required, and for what it will be used - Any AS numbers. - Reverse delegation, if required d. The intended date of return of the IP resources above. Once the above information has been reviewed by AfriNIC, the requesting entity will be required to fill the appropriate resource-request form and submit to hostmaster@afrinic.net 3.2 Commercial Use Prohibited If there is any evidence that the temporary resource is being used for commercial purposes, or is being used for any activities not documented in the original description provided above, AfriNIC reserves the right to immediately withdraw the resource and reassign it to the free pool. 4.0 Administrative fees to AfriNIC ---------------------------------- AfriNIC may charge administrative fees (if necessary) for assignment of the temporary IP numbers above. ============================================ Incentive: In Africa Internet is still a growing technology and time by time there are high level trainings and event related to Internet awareness. In most of the case the local hosting organisation do not have enough IP address to provide to the workshop Infrastructure, resulting to intensives NAT usage. To avoid this, AfriNIC should be able to provide temporary address space under some specific conditions. This policy will allow AfriNIC to do that. --alain _______________________________________________ policy-wg mailing list policy-wg@afrinic.net http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg Mouhamet Diop CEO NEXT SA 79 Rue Joseph Gomis 2eEtage BP 7474 DAKAR Tel: +221 8214202 Fax: +221 8214203 Cell:+221 6384288 http://www.next.sn SENEGAL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/policy-wg/attachments/20050416/95c135b8/attachment.htm From adiel at afrinic.net Sat Apr 16 18:25:38 2005 From: adiel at afrinic.net (Adiel A. AKPLOGAN) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:09 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Guidelines for Temporary Assignments/Allocations's proposal Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20050416182535.04ec1888@mail.afrinic.net> >Hello Alain, > >i just suggested that we extend the period for this temporary assignment >to 3 months. >We should take into account : The One month start from the time the allocation is approved and made. So: > 1- The time to instruct the demand and to issue the IP address Not part of the month > 2- Time to be really sure about the event in itself The requester must be sure before requesting the IP addresses. As the date of the events/experiments must be provide too. > 3- Time for the send a request to the Telco or the ISP for routing How much time is need for that? Maybe 72 hours? > 4- Time to configure and to be sure that the routing issues are solved > in the Telco or the ISP network > 5- Testing period > 6- The event in itself Maybe for events, the period of lease will depend on the duration: A two week event can sort out all the test and routing in two other weeks. Anyway I saw somewhere in the document that the lease can be renewed. My two cents. - a. >"AINA ALAIN PATRICK(TRS)" wrote: >--------------------------------------------------- >Name: Alain P. Aina >Organisation: TRS Technology >Country: Togo >Policy Afected: New >Date: 16.04.2005 >Proposal: >Temporary IP allocation in AfriNIC region. >--------------------------------------------------- >Guidelines for Temporary Assignments/Allocations: >================================================= >1.0 Introduction: >----------------- >In some circumstances, organisations may require IP resources for a certain >period of time, usually one month and less. This could be for exhibitions, >conferences, conventions, etc. >AfriNIC will therefore assign numbering resources to entities requiring >temporary IP numbers for a fixed period of time. In this document, "IP >resources" refers to unicast IPv4/v6 addresses and AS numbers. >2.0 Document! ing the temporary activity: >-------------------------------------- >The activity requiring temporary IP resources should be publicly documented >and >available, preferably on a website. Entities requiring such IP resources are >expected to demonstrate an understanding that when the activity or experiment >for which they require the IP resources ends, the IP resources will be >returned >to AfriNIC. >A "publicly accessible document" is a document that is publicly and openly >available free of charge and free of any constraints of disclosure. >AfriNIC will not recognize any activity under this policy if such an activity >cannot be publicly disclosed. >3.0 Assignments of IP resources >------------------------------ >Resources are assigned on a lease basis for a period of one month. The >assignment can be renewed on application to AfriNIC providing the necessary >information . The size of the assigned IP resource will be determine! d >from the >plan submitted by the requesting entity. >3.1 Required Documentation: >The requesting organisation should send an e-mail to hostmaster@afrinic.net >with >the following contents: >a. Details of Organisation: - Legal Organisation name - Country Where >Registered >- Postal Address - Physical Address - Telephone and Fax Numbers - website >(this >is a must) >b. Details of activity requiring the temporary assignment. - Website >detailing >the activity - Website with a link to similar prevsious activities - Links >from >other (relevant) sites about this activity - Any other information that >AfriNIC >should know about - Date when the above activity ends. >c. The planned use of these IP resources - List subnet size required, and for >what it will be used - Any AS numbers. - Reverse delegation, if required >d. The intended date of return of the IP resources above. >Once the above information has been review! ed by AfriNIC, the requesting >entity >will be required to fill the appropriate resource-request form and submit to >hostmaster@afrinic.net >3.2 Commercial Use Prohibited >If there is any evidence that the temporary resource is being used for >commercial purposes, or is being used for any activities not documented in >the >original description provided above, AfriNIC reserves the right to >immediately >withdraw the resource and reassign it to the free pool. >4.0 Administrative fees to AfriNIC >---------------------------------- >AfriNIC may charge administrative fees (if necessary) for assignment of the >temporary IP numbers above. >============================================ >Incentive: >In Africa Internet is still a growing technology and time by time >there are high level trainings and event related to Internet >awareness. In most of the case the local hosting organisation >do not have enough IP address to provide to the workshop >Infrastructure, resulting to intensives NAT usage. To avoid this, >AfriNIC should be able to provide temporary address space under >some specific conditions. This policy will allow AfriNIC to do that. > >--alain >_______________________________________________ >policy-wg mailing list >policy-wg@afrinic.net >http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg > > > >Mouhamet Diop >CEO >NEXT SA >79 Rue Joseph Gomis 2eEtage >BP 7474 DAKAR >Tel: +221 8214202 >Fax: +221 8214203 >Cell:+221 6384288 >http://www.next.sn >SENEGAL >_______________________________________________ >policy-wg mailing list >policy-wg@afrinic.net >http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg From mtinka at africaonline.co.sz Sun Apr 17 18:37:08 2005 From: mtinka at africaonline.co.sz (Mark Tinka) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:09 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Change in ASN policy: Eligibility criteria Section 4 Message-ID: <200504171837.08756.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> Name: ?Mark Tinka Organisation: Africa Online Swaziland Policy Affected: ASN (afpol-as200407-000) Date: 16.04.2005 Proposal: Precision in ASN policy documents about Assignment criteria ** Section 4 of the policy document Was: "4.0 Eligibility for an AS Number assignment: -------------------------------------------- There are a limited number of available AS Numbers. Therefore, it is important to determine which sites require unique AS Numbers and which do not. Sites that do not require a unique AS Number should use one or more of the AS Numbers reserved for private use. Those numbers are: 64512 through 65535 (RFC 1930). In order to qualify for an AS number, the requesting organization must fulfill the following requirements: o A unique routing policy (its policy differs from its border gateway peers). o A multi-homed site. o An organization will also be eligible if it can demonstrate that it will meet the above criteria upon receiving an ASN (or within a reasonably short time thereafter). All requests for ASNs under these criteria will be evaluated using the guidelines described in RFC1930 "Guidelines for the creation, selection and registration of an Autonomous System (AS)". " Should be: "4.0 Eligibility for an AS Number assignment: --------------------------------------------- There are a limited number of available AS Numbers. Therefore, it is important to determine which sites require unique AS Numbers and which do not. Sites that do not require a unique AS Number should use one or more of the AS Numbers reserved for private use. Those numbers are: 64512 through 65535 (RFC 1930). In order to qualify for an AS number, the requesting organization must fulfill the following requirements: o A unique routing policy (its policy differs from its border gateway peers). o A multi-homed site. o An organization will also be eligible if it can demonstrate that it will meet the above criteria upon receiving an ASN (or within a reasonably short time thereafter). o Be an AfriNIC member in a good standing* (End-User or LIR type) All requests for ASNs under these criteria will be evaluated using the guidelines described in RFC1930 "Guidelines for the creation, selection and registration of an Autonomous System (AS)"." ---- Incentive: The original policy do not give precision on the membership criteria for ASN assignment. To better control this resource assignment Organisation using ASN must be specifically identified by AfriNIC. Mark. From mtinka at africaonline.co.sz Sun Apr 17 18:37:35 2005 From: mtinka at africaonline.co.sz (Mark Tinka) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:09 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Policy proposal: IPv4 allocation to End Users Message-ID: <200504171837.35934.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> Name: ?Mark Tinka Organisation: Africa Online Swaziland Policy Affected: New Date: 16.04.2005 Proposal: IPv4 Assignments to end-users in AfriNIC region Introduction: ------------- AfriNIC assigns blocks of IP addresses to end-users who request address space for their internal use in running their own networks, but not for sub-delegation or reassignment of those addresses outside their organization. End-users must meet some requirement for justifying the assignment of an address block. Determination of IP address space allocation size is the responsibility of AfriNIC staff. In an effort to ensure that Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) is implemented and utilized as efficiently as possible, AfriNIC will issue blocks of addresses on appropriate "CIDR-supported" bit boundaries with a 'slow start' mechanism. Minimum assignment: ------------------- In general, the minimum block of IP address space assigned by AfriNIC to end- users is a /24. If assignments smaller than /24 are needed, end-users should contact their upstream provider. Prefixes assigned to End-User will be from a block reserved for that purpose. First End-user assignment criteria: ---------------------------------- The requesting End users must a)??????Show either an existing efficient utilization of at less /25 from their upstream provider. b)??????Justification of an immediate need of at less 50% of total requested size based on its Network Infrastructure. Eg: new Company. Additional Assignment: ---------------------- Utilization rate of address space is a key factor in justifying a new assignment of IP address space. Requesters must show exactly how previous address assignments have been utilized and must provide appropriate details to verify their one-year growth projection. The basic criteria that must be met are: *????A 25% immediate utilization rate, and *???A 50% utilization rate within one year. A greater utilization rate may be required based on individual network requirements. Private IP address: End-users not currently connected to an ISP and/or plan not to be connected to the Internet are encouraged to use private IP numbers reserved for non-connected networks (see RFC 1918). End-User Assignment to critical Infrastructure: ----------------------------------------------- AfriNIC will make End-User assignment to critical infrastructure providers of the Internet, including public exchange points, core DNS service providers (e.g. ICANN-sanctioned root, gTLD, and ccTLD operators). These allocations will be no longer than a /24 using IPv4. Multiple allocations may be granted in certain situations. - Exchange point assignment MUST be assigned from specific blocks reserved only for this purpose. ? AfriNIC will make a list of these blocks publicly available. - Exchange point ? operators must provide justification for the allocation, including: connection ? policy, location, other participants (minimum of two total), ASN, and contact ? information. This policy does not preclude exchange point operators from ? requesting address space under other policies such as becoming LIR. ** Some definitions: Exchange point: An Internet Exchange Point is defined as a physical network infrastructure (layer 2) operated by a single entity whose purpose is to facilitate the exchange of Internet traffic between ISPs. There must be a minimum of three ISPs connected and there must be a clear and open policy for others to join. Addresses needed for other purposes (e.g. additional services provided to the members) should be acquired through the appropriate means (e.g. an upstream ISP). Core DNS service provider: ?A core DNS service provider is a company who provides DNS service for the root level of the DNS tree (ICANN-sanctioned root operators) or for Country Code Top Level domain (ICANN accredited ccTLD managers). -- Incentive: To define criteria for IPv4 allocation to End Users which does not exist yet in AfriNIC region. Mark. From christianakplogan at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 23:43:29 2005 From: christianakplogan at yahoo.com (Christian Hugues Raymond Dona) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:09 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Guidelines for Temporary Assignments/Allocations's proposal In-Reply-To: <20050416151158.37870.qmail@web50105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20050419214329.45542.qmail@web50806.mail.yahoo.com> Cher Alain, Je remercie les diverses ?quipes en vue des multiples avanc?es depuis notre derni?res rencontres ? ouaga. Bonnes propositions. A quoi s'en tenir au niveau national, sous-r?gionale, r?gionale tenant compte de l'existant. Un comit? de pilotage s'impose ? tous les niveaux en vue d'une harmonisation ax?es sur les r?sultats, et un suivi techniques des acquis. Lamine DIOP wrote: Hello Alain, i just suggested that we extend the period for this temporary assignment to 3 months. We should take into account : 1- The time to instruct the demand and to issue the IP address 2- Time to be really sure about the event in itself 3- Time for the send a request to the Telco or the ISP for routing 4- Time to configure and to be sure that the routing issues are solved in the Telco or the ISP network 5- Testing period 6- The event in itself I did not see these items covered in our environment in one month. Please reconsider the period. Regards Mouhamet Diop "AINA ALAIN PATRICK(TRS)" wrote: --------------------------------------------------- Name: Alain P. Aina Organisation: TRS Technology Country: Togo Policy Afected: New Date: 16.04.2005 Proposal: Temporary IP allocation in AfriNIC region. --------------------------------------------------- Guidelines for Temporary Assignments/Allocations: ================================================= 1.0 Introduction: ----------------- In some circumstances, organisations may require IP resources for a certain period of time, usually one month and less. This could be for exhibitions, conferences, conventions, etc. AfriNIC will therefore assign numbering resources to entities requiring temporary IP numbers for a fixed period of time. In this document, "IP resources" refers to unicast IPv4/v6 addresses and AS numbers. 2.0 Document! ing the temporary activity: -------------------------------------- The activity requiring temporary IP resources should be publicly documented and available, preferably on a website. Entities requiring such IP resources are expected to demonstrate an understanding that when the activity or experiment for which they require the IP resources ends, the IP resources will be returned to AfriNIC. A "publicly accessible document" is a document that is publicly and openly available free of charge and free of any constraints of disclosure. AfriNIC will not recognize any activity under this policy if such an activity cannot be publicly disclosed. 3.0 Assignments of IP resources ------------------------------ Resources are assigned on a lease basis for a period of one month. The assignment can be renewed on application to AfriNIC providing the necessary information . The size of the assigned IP resource will be determine! d from the plan submitted by the requesting entity. 3.1 Required Documentation: The requesting organisation should send an e-mail to hostmaster@afrinic.net with the following contents: a. Details of Organisation: - Legal Organisation name - Country Where Registered - Postal Address - Physical Address - Telephone and Fax Numbers - website (this is a must) b. Details of activity requiring the temporary assignment. - Website detailing the activity - Website with a link to similar prevsious activities - Links from other (relevant) sites about this activity - Any other information that AfriNIC should know about - Date when the above activity ends. c. The planned use of these IP resources - List subnet size required, and for what it will be used - Any AS numbers. - Reverse delegation, if required d. The intended date of return of the IP resources above. Once the above information has been review! ed by AfriNIC, the requesting entity will be required to fill the appropriate resource-request form and submit to hostmaster@afrinic.net 3.2 Commercial Use Prohibited If there is any evidence that the temporary resource is being used for commercial purposes, or is being used for any activities not documented in the original description provided above, AfriNIC reserves the right to immediately withdraw the resource and reassign it to the free pool. 4.0 Administrative fees to AfriNIC ---------------------------------- AfriNIC may charge administrative fees (if necessary) for assignment of the temporary IP numbers above. ============================================ Incentive: In Africa Internet is still a growing technology and time by time there are high level trainings and event related to Internet awareness. In most of the case the local hosting organisation do not have enough IP address to provide to the workshop Infrastructure, resulting to intensives NAT usage. To avoid this, AfriNIC should be able to provide temporary address space under some specific conditions. This policy will allow AfriNIC to do that. --alain _______________________________________________ policy-wg mailing list policy-wg@afrinic.net http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg Mouhamet Diop CEO NEXT SA 79 Rue Joseph Gomis 2eEtage BP 7474 DAKAR Tel: +221 8214202 Fax: +221 8214203 Cell:+221 6384288 http://www.next.sn SENEGAL_______________________________________________ policy-wg mailing list policy-wg@afrinic.net http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg ------------------------------------------ "Christ" Christian Hugues Ramond Dona AKPLOGAN -------------------------------------------- Engineer in Information System and Management : Network, Telecom. Analyst in Computer Science and Management, Data Processing and Programming and Data multidimensionnal Analysis. Statistics and Information Technology International Specialist. Internet Server builder and Administrator. Network Security, Multidimensionnal Meta and Data Bases Analysis. ..................................................... --------------------------------- D?couvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 250 Mo d'espace de stockage pour vos mails ! Cr?ez votre Yahoo! Mail -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/policy-wg/attachments/20050419/cd96646b/attachment.htm From alan at futureperfect.co.za Wed Apr 20 09:07:57 2005 From: alan at futureperfect.co.za (Alan Levin) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:09 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Change in ASN policy: Eligibility criteria Section 4 In-Reply-To: <200504171837.08756.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> References: <200504171837.08756.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> Message-ID: <11f8770a7e446c57856bff704f631a0c@futureperfect.co.za> Hi, On 17 Apr 2005, at 18:37, Mark Tinka wrote: > o Be an AfriNIC member in a good standing* (End-User or LIR type) > > The original policy do not give precision on the membership criteria > for ASN assignment. To better control this resource assignment > Organisation using ASN must be specifically identified by AfriNIC. Due to the effects of the new pricing model for ARIN customers, I am not yet in favour of this additional requirement. I have discussed this with members of ISPA SA and proposing a new model at the meetings. sincerely Alan From gregm at datapro.co.za Wed Apr 20 12:48:10 2005 From: gregm at datapro.co.za (Gregory Massel) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:09 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Change in ASN policy: Eligibility criteria Section 4 References: <200504171837.08756.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> <11f8770a7e446c57856bff704f631a0c@futureperfect.co.za> Message-ID: <004c01c54596$71dd0bd0$1af223c4@gregm> > Due to the effects of the new pricing model for ARIN customers, I am not > yet in favour of this additional requirement. I have discussed this with > members of ISPA SA and proposing a new model at the meetings. I second that. I feel it is completely unreasonable to impose an additional $400 per annum on organisations that simply require an ASN. In general, I am not a fan of any of the RIR's policies that force organisations to become members in order to obtain resources. This just creates a situation where a number of people who view the RIR purely as a resource provider are forced to receive email that they just delete and makes it difficult to assess the involvement of interested parties at meetings, in the policy process, etc. I gather that part of this - at least in certain jurisdictions - has been for tax or structural purposes. In some jurisdictions it may be tricky for a non-profit organisation to receive income rather than membership fees. Unless there is a such a tax/structural requirement for AfriNIC, I'd strongly encourage a split between membership fees from resource fees. --Greg From adiel at akplogan.com Wed Apr 20 16:03:38 2005 From: adiel at akplogan.com (Adiel A. Akplogan) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:09 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Change in ASN policy: Eligibility criteria Section 4 In-Reply-To: <004c01c54596$71dd0bd0$1af223c4@gregm> References: <200504171837.08756.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> <11f8770a7e446c57856bff704f631a0c@futureperfect.co.za> <004c01c54596$71dd0bd0$1af223c4@gregm> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20050420160249.02f8cee0@pop.gmail.com> >>Due to the effects of the new pricing model for ARIN customers, I am not >>yet in favour of this additional requirement. I have discussed this with >>members of ISPA SA and proposing a new model at the meetings. > >I second that. I feel it is completely unreasonable to impose an >additional $400 per annum on organisations that simply require an ASN. Just a clarification here. The 400 is not per annum, it is the setup fee. The ASN annual fee is 50 USD. - a. From christianakplogan at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 22:19:57 2005 From: christianakplogan at yahoo.com (Christian Hugues Raymond Dona) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:09 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Change in ASN policy: Eligibility criteria Section 4 In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050420201957.14655.qmail@web50805.mail.yahoo.com> Hi! That is a problematics of RIR or NIC or SRIR in general. Truely that information need explanation in the level of which need this for their organization at this time which IPV6 or we can provide a IP or address for all items and theirs components. Regards and take care. Gregory Massel wrote: > Due to the effects of the new pricing model for ARIN customers, I am not > yet in favour of this additional requirement. I have discussed this with > members of ISPA SA and proposing a new model at the meetings. I second that. I feel it is completely unreasonable to impose an additional $400 per annum on organisations that simply require an ASN. In general, I am not a fan of any of the RIR's policies that force organisations to become members in order to obtain resources. This just creates a situation where a number of people who view the RIR purely as a resource provider are forced to receive email that they just delete and makes it difficult to assess the involvement of interested parties at meetings, in the policy process, etc. I gather that part of this - at least in certain jurisdictions - has been for tax or structural purposes. In some jurisdictions it may be tricky for a non-profit organisation to receive income rather than membership fees. Unless there is a such a tax/structural requirement for AfriNIC, I'd strongly encourage a split between membership fees from resource fees. --Greg _______________________________________________ policy-wg mailing list policy-wg@afrinic.net http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg --------------------------------- D?couvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 250 Mo d'espace de stockage pour vos mails ! Cr?ez votre Yahoo! Mail -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/policy-wg/attachments/20050420/fa56f17c/attachment.htm From alan at futureperfect.co.za Thu Apr 21 09:00:52 2005 From: alan at futureperfect.co.za (Alan Levin) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Change in ASN policy: Eligibility criteria Section 4 In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20050420160249.02f8cee0@pop.gmail.com> References: <200504171837.08756.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> <11f8770a7e446c57856bff704f631a0c@futureperfect.co.za> <004c01c54596$71dd0bd0$1af223c4@gregm> <6.1.2.0.2.20050420160249.02f8cee0@pop.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0089a0c856f5fb0e1e73225c68526f2a@futureperfect.co.za> hi Adiel, On 20 Apr 2005, at 16:03, Adiel A. Akplogan wrote: > Just a clarification here. The 400 is not per annum, it is the setup > fee. The ASN annual fee is 50 USD. For your clarity, we are discussing Marks proposal to extend the policy requirement for an ASN to include membership. You are correct that ASN annual fee is $50, but if Marks suggestion is supported then as Greg says, those with ASNs will also have to pay the $400 membership fee. I am not against Marks proposal in spirit, as you all know, I am most concerned about the fee structure and will be meeting with Harish to discuss the alternatives as suggested by ISPA SA members, on Sunday. regards, Alan --------------------------------------------- Alan Levin Tel: +27 21 409-7997 From adiel at afrinic.net Thu Apr 21 14:42:23 2005 From: adiel at afrinic.net (Adiel A. Akplogan) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Change in ASN policy: Eligibility criteria Section 4 In-Reply-To: <0089a0c856f5fb0e1e73225c68526f2a@futureperfect.co.za> References: <200504171837.08756.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> <11f8770a7e446c57856bff704f631a0c@futureperfect.co.za> <004c01c54596$71dd0bd0$1af223c4@gregm> <6.1.2.0.2.20050420160249.02f8cee0@pop.gmail.com> <0089a0c856f5fb0e1e73225c68526f2a@futureperfect.co.za> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20050421143522.02ed3038@mail.afrinic.net> Ye I understand that, What I was clarifying is that ASN resource holders are considered in a different membership category which cost 50 USD annually not 400 USD which is what is paid by member-only category (No resources assigned or allocated) - The fee schedule document is clear on that I think, If not it need to be clearly stated. thanks. - a. >On 20 Apr 2005, at 16:03, Adiel A. Akplogan wrote: >>Just a clarification here. The 400 is not per annum, it is the setup fee. >>The ASN annual fee is 50 USD. > >For your clarity, we are discussing Marks proposal to extend the policy >requirement for an ASN to include membership. You are correct that ASN >annual fee is $50, but if Marks suggestion is supported then as Greg says, >those with ASNs will also have to pay the $400 membership fee. > >I am not against Marks proposal in spirit, as you all know, I am most >concerned about the fee structure and will be meeting with Harish to >discuss the alternatives as suggested by ISPA SA members, on Sunday. > >regards, > >Alan > > > > > >--------------------------------------------- >Alan Levin >Tel: +27 21 409-7997 > >_______________________________________________ >policy-wg mailing list >policy-wg@afrinic.net >http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg From alan at futureperfect.co.za Thu Apr 21 16:10:08 2005 From: alan at futureperfect.co.za (Alan Levin) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Change in ASN policy: Eligibility criteria Section 4 In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20050421143522.02ed3038@mail.afrinic.net> References: <200504171837.08756.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> <11f8770a7e446c57856bff704f631a0c@futureperfect.co.za> <004c01c54596$71dd0bd0$1af223c4@gregm> <6.1.2.0.2.20050420160249.02f8cee0@pop.gmail.com> <0089a0c856f5fb0e1e73225c68526f2a@futureperfect.co.za> <6.1.2.0.2.20050421143522.02ed3038@mail.afrinic.net> Message-ID: Hi, On 21 Apr 2005, at 14:42, Adiel A. Akplogan wrote: > Ye I understand that, What I was clarifying is that ASN resource > holders are considered in a different membership category which cost > 50 USD annually not 400 USD which is what is paid by member-only > category (No resources assigned or allocated) - The fee schedule > document is clear on that I think, If not it need to be clearly > stated. Ok, understood. That definitely helps and I suggest that as such Marks proposal is redundant. Mark? I agree that the fees document may have some scope for improvement. thank you, Alan --------------------------------------------- Alan Levin Tel: +27 21 409-7997 From adiel at afrinic.net Thu Apr 21 17:28:57 2005 From: adiel at afrinic.net (Adiel A. Akplogan) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Change in ASN policy: Eligibility criteria Section 4 In-Reply-To: References: <200504171837.08756.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> <11f8770a7e446c57856bff704f631a0c@futureperfect.co.za> <004c01c54596$71dd0bd0$1af223c4@gregm> <6.1.2.0.2.20050420160249.02f8cee0@pop.gmail.com> <0089a0c856f5fb0e1e73225c68526f2a@futureperfect.co.za> <6.1.2.0.2.20050421143522.02ed3038@mail.afrinic.net> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20050421172649.03219e38@mail.afrinic.net> >On 21 Apr 2005, at 14:42, Adiel A. Akplogan wrote: >>Ye I understand that, What I was clarifying is that ASN resource holders >>are considered in a different membership category which cost 50 USD >>annually not 400 USD which is what is paid by member-only category (No >>resources assigned or allocated) - The fee schedule document is clear on >>that I think, If not it need to be clearly stated. > >Ok, understood. That definitely helps and I suggest that as such Marks >proposal is redundant. Mark? Alan, it is not redundant in my sense as his proposal is to complete the Policy document which different from the 'Fee documents'! Two different things. - a. From gregm at datapro.co.za Mon Apr 25 20:35:37 2005 From: gregm at datapro.co.za (Gregory Massel) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Policy proposal: IPv4 allocation to End Users References: <200504171837.35934.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> Message-ID: <008201c549c5$93a20120$0a1929c4@groglet> /24 ? This seems to be a bit out of line with the other RIRs and given the current exponential growth of the global routing table, may need reconsideration. While I don't object to this in the case of critical infrastructure, I question why an end-user should require provider independent space instead of provider aggregatable space. The proposed policy doesn't make it clear if this applies only to critical infrastructure or if that is simply one example. --Greg ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Tinka" To: Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2005 6:37 PM Subject: [policy-wg] Policy proposal: IPv4 allocation to End Users > Name: Mark Tinka > Organisation: Africa Online Swaziland > > Policy Affected: New > Date: 16.04.2005 > Proposal: IPv4 Assignments to end-users in AfriNIC region > > Introduction: > ------------- > > AfriNIC assigns blocks of IP addresses to end-users who request > address space for their internal use in running their own networks, but > not > for > sub-delegation or reassignment of those addresses outside their > organization. > End-users must meet some requirement for justifying the assignment of an > address > block. > > Determination of IP address space allocation size is the responsibility > of AfriNIC staff. In an effort to ensure that Classless Inter-Domain > Routing > (CIDR) is implemented and utilized as efficiently as possible, AfriNIC > will > issue blocks of addresses on appropriate "CIDR-supported" bit boundaries > with a > 'slow start' mechanism. > > Minimum assignment: > ------------------- > > In general, the minimum block of IP address space assigned by AfriNIC to > end- > users is a /24. If assignments smaller than /24 are needed, end-users > should > contact their upstream provider. Prefixes assigned to End-User will be > from a > block reserved for that purpose. > > First End-user assignment criteria: > ---------------------------------- > > The requesting End users must > > a) Show either an existing efficient utilization of at less /25 from > their upstream provider. > > b) Justification of an immediate need of at less 50% of total requested > size based on its Network Infrastructure. Eg: new Company. > > > Additional Assignment: > ---------------------- > > Utilization rate of address space is a key factor in justifying a new > assignment > of IP address space. Requesters must show exactly how previous address > assignments have been utilized and must provide appropriate details to > verify > their one-year growth projection. The basic criteria that must be met are: > * A > 25% immediate utilization rate, and * A 50% utilization rate within one > year. A > greater utilization rate may be required based on individual network > requirements. Private IP address: End-users not currently connected to an > ISP > and/or plan not to be connected to the Internet are encouraged to use > private IP > numbers reserved for non-connected networks (see RFC 1918). > > > End-User Assignment to critical Infrastructure: > ----------------------------------------------- > > AfriNIC will make End-User assignment to critical infrastructure providers > of > the Internet, including public exchange points, core DNS service providers > (e.g. > ICANN-sanctioned root, gTLD, and ccTLD operators). These allocations will > be no > longer than a /24 using IPv4. Multiple allocations may be granted in > certain > situations. - Exchange point assignment MUST be assigned from specific > blocks > reserved only for this purpose. > > AfriNIC will make a list of these blocks publicly available. - Exchange > point > operators must provide justification for the allocation, including: > connection > policy, location, other participants (minimum of two total), ASN, and > contact > information. This policy does not preclude exchange point operators from > requesting address space under other policies such as becoming LIR. > > > ** Some definitions: > > Exchange point: An Internet Exchange Point is defined as a physical > network > infrastructure (layer 2) operated by a single entity whose purpose is to > facilitate the exchange of Internet traffic between ISPs. There must be a > minimum of three ISPs connected and there must be a clear and open policy > for others to join. Addresses needed for other purposes (e.g. additional > services provided to the members) should be acquired through the > appropriate > means (e.g. an upstream ISP). > > Core DNS service provider: A core DNS service provider is a company who > provides DNS service for the root level of the DNS tree (ICANN-sanctioned > root > operators) or for Country Code Top Level domain (ICANN accredited ccTLD > managers). > > -- > > Incentive: To define criteria for IPv4 allocation to End Users which does > not exist yet in AfriNIC region. > > Mark. > > _______________________________________________ > policy-wg mailing list > policy-wg@afrinic.net > http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg > From gregm at datapro.co.za Mon Apr 25 20:49:57 2005 From: gregm at datapro.co.za (Gregory Massel) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Guidelines for Temporary Assignments/Allocations'sproposal References: <200504161505.21885.aalain@trstech.net> Message-ID: <00b301c549c8$26c24580$0a1929c4@groglet> > In some circumstances, organisations may require IP resources for a > certain > period of time, usually one month and less. This could be for exhibitions, > conferences, conventions, etc. This really concerns me. Assignments/Allocations generally take quite some time to evaluate. They are also based on a co-ordinated long-term usage history and future usage plan. Once addresses are used, they can often be subject to blacklisting (particularly if hosts are vulnerable to hacking, spam, etc). This means that it is often extremely unsatisfactory for an organisation to receive addresses already used by another. This is exaccerbated further by the fact that short-term assignments don't allow extended periods to do the necessary audits and clean-ups. > 3.2 Commercial Use Prohibited > > If there is any evidence that the temporary resource is being used for > commercial purposes, or is being used for any activities not documented in > the > original description provided above, AfriNIC reserves the right to > immediately > withdraw the resource and reassign it to the free pool. This conflicts with the statement of intent. A conference, exhibition, etc is generally a commercial activity. This needs to be clarified. > Incentive: > In Africa Internet is still a growing technology and time by time > there are high level trainings and event related to Internet > awareness. In most of the case the local hosting organisation > do not have enough IP address to provide to the workshop > Infrastructure, resulting to intensives NAT usage. To avoid this, > AfriNIC should be able to provide temporary address space under > some specific conditions. This policy will allow AfriNIC to do that. There is a big problem with this motivation. It works on the basis that the upstream is mismanaging their existing IP space and therefore cannot supply it. I would rather see the inherent problem addressed. ie. Why does the upstream not have sufficient addresses? Is there a problem with AfriNIC that is making it impossible for them to obtain sufficient address space? Are they in need of training on how to manage their IP's and apply for more? If so is AfriNIC doing enough in that regard. I strongly object to the policy proposal. It attempting to correct one problem by introucing another. The better approach would be to promote efficient allocation and management of addresses so that LIRS have sufficient address space available to cope with temporary assignments. Ultimately, if LIRs are managing their space correctly and the RIR (AfriNIC) is processing the LIR's requests reasonably and fairly, then the LIR should always have sufficient free space for temporary assignments. --Greg From woody at pch.net Tue Apr 26 01:50:32 2005 From: woody at pch.net (Bill Woodcock) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Policy proposal: IPv4 allocation to End Users In-Reply-To: <008201c549c5$93a20120$0a1929c4@groglet> References: <200504171837.35934.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> <008201c549c5$93a20120$0a1929c4@groglet> Message-ID: On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Gregory Massel wrote: > /24 ? > This seems to be a bit out of line with the other RIRs and given the > current exponential growth of the global routing table, may need > reconsideration. This is an issue we've been discussing a bit within ARIN recently, with regard to IPv6, but it's the same issue at heart... There are a bunch of independently-routable /24s out there, and they were allocated or assigned early on, as "Class C" "swamp" addresses. I mean, they were called "Class C" at the time, and we later designated the portion of the IP spectrum which they came out of as "the swamp" because it was made up of lots of little blocks. Now, there's something of an inequity in that those /24s are typically held by people who arrived early, who weren't in Africa by and large, or those who have enough connections or money to make a transaction to get one from someone who got one that way. Again, probably not someone in Africa. So on the one hand, we have a "do as I say, not as I do" inequity being handed from the early-arriving North American and European operators to the later-arriving African and Latin American operators. On the other hand, we do have a very real need to conserve memory and CPU in routers, and that need is in fact greater in areas like Africa and Latin America, where operators can't afford to upgrade equipment as frequently or spend as much when they to, to accommodate routing table growth. The approach we've been talking about in ARIN is to find a reasonable "cap" number. That is, to begin with a liberal policy (like /24 minimum allocation) but only up to a certain number of allocations (like 250 or 500 of them) which is not enough, even if replicated in other regions, to cause routers to fall over in great numbers. This would have the effect of creating another, African-specific, "swamp" of /24s. They would be filtered out of the routing table by some people, which would make them less valuable than larger allocations, but they might meet some people's needs, and they wouldn't become a big problem. Moreover, by being liberal up-front, you might find that you address a strong need of a small number of organizations, without creating any difficulty for anyone else. For instance, you might allocate a block of 512 /24s, and get a "run" on them initially, allocating 100 in the first few months, and then five years later, you might find that you'd only allocated another 100... No problem, it takes care of those who need it, without creating any big issue for anyone else. One approach to think about. -Bill From adiel at akplogan.com Tue Apr 26 02:03:27 2005 From: adiel at akplogan.com (Adiel A. Akplogan) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Policy proposal: IPv4 allocation to End Users In-Reply-To: <008201c549c5$93a20120$0a1929c4@groglet> References: <200504171837.35934.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> <008201c549c5$93a20120$0a1929c4@groglet> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20050426015813.03175e88@pop.gmail.com> At 20:35 25/04/2005 +0200, you wrote: >/24 ? > >This seems to be a bit out of line with the other RIRs and given the >current exponential growth of the global routing table, may need >reconsideration. No Gregory, all other RIR do assign /24 PI space to end-user. The routing issue is more about the upstream provider willing to announce it or not. And the PI space supporting document do WARN small PI space size requesters about the risk of not beeing able to make it routed by their upstream provider. NOt that this policy is only apply to end users not LIRs! >While I don't object to this in the case of critical infrastructure, I >question why an end-user should require provider independent space instead >of provider aggregatable space. Because they don't qualify for becoming LIR. But do need their own IP block for justifiable reason. >The proposed policy doesn't make it clear if this applies only to critical >infrastructure or if that is simply one example. Not only to critical Infrastructure... I guest - a. >--Greg >----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Tinka" >To: >Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2005 6:37 PM >Subject: [policy-wg] Policy proposal: IPv4 allocation to End Users > > >>Name: Mark Tinka >>Organisation: Africa Online Swaziland >> >>Policy Affected: New >>Date: 16.04.2005 >>Proposal: IPv4 Assignments to end-users in AfriNIC region >> >>Introduction: >>------------- >> >>AfriNIC assigns blocks of IP addresses to end-users who request >>address space for their internal use in running their own networks, but not >>for >>sub-delegation or reassignment of those addresses outside their organization. >>End-users must meet some requirement for justifying the assignment of an >>address >>block. >> >>Determination of IP address space allocation size is the responsibility >>of AfriNIC staff. In an effort to ensure that Classless Inter-Domain Routing >>(CIDR) is implemented and utilized as efficiently as possible, AfriNIC will >>issue blocks of addresses on appropriate "CIDR-supported" bit boundaries >>with a >>'slow start' mechanism. >> >>Minimum assignment: >>------------------- >> >>In general, the minimum block of IP address space assigned by AfriNIC to end- >>users is a /24. If assignments smaller than /24 are needed, end-users should >>contact their upstream provider. Prefixes assigned to End-User will be from a >>block reserved for that purpose. >> >>First End-user assignment criteria: >>---------------------------------- >> >>The requesting End users must >> >>a) Show either an existing efficient utilization of at less /25 from >>their upstream provider. >> >>b) Justification of an immediate need of at less 50% of total requested >>size based on its Network Infrastructure. Eg: new Company. >> >> >>Additional Assignment: >>---------------------- >> >>Utilization rate of address space is a key factor in justifying a new >>assignment >>of IP address space. Requesters must show exactly how previous address >>assignments have been utilized and must provide appropriate details to verify >>their one-year growth projection. The basic criteria that must be met are: >>* A >>25% immediate utilization rate, and * A 50% utilization rate within one >>year. A >>greater utilization rate may be required based on individual network >>requirements. Private IP address: End-users not currently connected to an ISP >>and/or plan not to be connected to the Internet are encouraged to use >>private IP >>numbers reserved for non-connected networks (see RFC 1918). >> >> >>End-User Assignment to critical Infrastructure: >>----------------------------------------------- >> >>AfriNIC will make End-User assignment to critical infrastructure providers of >>the Internet, including public exchange points, core DNS service providers >>(e.g. >>ICANN-sanctioned root, gTLD, and ccTLD operators). These allocations will >>be no >>longer than a /24 using IPv4. Multiple allocations may be granted in certain >>situations. - Exchange point assignment MUST be assigned from specific blocks >>reserved only for this purpose. >> >>AfriNIC will make a list of these blocks publicly available. - Exchange >>point >>operators must provide justification for the allocation, including: >>connection >>policy, location, other participants (minimum of two total), ASN, and >>contact >>information. This policy does not preclude exchange point operators from >>requesting address space under other policies such as becoming LIR. >> >> >>** Some definitions: >> >>Exchange point: An Internet Exchange Point is defined as a physical network >>infrastructure (layer 2) operated by a single entity whose purpose is to >>facilitate the exchange of Internet traffic between ISPs. There must be a >>minimum of three ISPs connected and there must be a clear and open policy >>for others to join. Addresses needed for other purposes (e.g. additional >>services provided to the members) should be acquired through the appropriate >>means (e.g. an upstream ISP). >> >>Core DNS service provider: A core DNS service provider is a company who >>provides DNS service for the root level of the DNS tree (ICANN-sanctioned >>root >>operators) or for Country Code Top Level domain (ICANN accredited ccTLD >>managers). >> >>-- >> >>Incentive: To define criteria for IPv4 allocation to End Users which does >>not exist yet in AfriNIC region. >> >>Mark. >> >>_______________________________________________ >>policy-wg mailing list >>policy-wg@afrinic.net >>http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg > > >_______________________________________________ >policy-wg mailing list >policy-wg@afrinic.net >http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg From adiel at akplogan.com Tue Apr 26 02:18:09 2005 From: adiel at akplogan.com (Adiel A. Akplogan) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Guidelines for Temporary Assignments/Allocations'sproposal In-Reply-To: <00b301c549c8$26c24580$0a1929c4@groglet> References: <200504161505.21885.aalain@trstech.net> <00b301c549c8$26c24580$0a1929c4@groglet> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20050426020345.0315fd60@pop.gmail.com> At 20:49 25/04/2005 +0200, you wrote: >>In some circumstances, organisations may require IP resources for a certain >>period of time, usually one month and less. This could be for exhibitions, >>conferences, conventions, etc. > >This really concerns me. Assignments/Allocations generally take quite some >time to evaluate. They are also based on a co-ordinated long-term usage >history and future usage plan. > >Once addresses are used, they can often be subject to blacklisting >(particularly if hosts are vulnerable to hacking, spam, etc). This means >that it is often extremely unsatisfactory for an organisation to receive >addresses already used by another. This is exaccerbated further by the >fact that short-term assignments don't allow extended periods to do the >necessary audits and clean-ups. I agree with you but this temporary allocation space will be done from a special address pool ... and event when returned, they are put in quarantine for some time before being reallocated (12 months?)! >>3.2 Commercial Use Prohibited >> >>If there is any evidence that the temporary resource is being used for >>commercial purposes, or is being used for any activities not documented >>in the >>original description provided above, AfriNIC reserves the right to >>immediately >>withdraw the resource and reassign it to the free pool. > >This conflicts with the statement of intent. A conference, exhibition, etc >is generally a commercial activity. This needs to be clarified. But in the case they are not (like AFNOG, RALL etc...) I think this is addressed somewhere in the proposal where it is stated that AfriNIC may charge for that..(that is apply for commercial training for instance) >>Incentive: >>In Africa Internet is still a growing technology and time by time >>there are high level trainings and event related to Internet >>awareness. In most of the case the local hosting organisation >>do not have enough IP address to provide to the workshop >>Infrastructure, resulting to intensives NAT usage. To avoid this, >>AfriNIC should be able to provide temporary address space under >>some specific conditions. This policy will allow AfriNIC to do that. > >There is a big problem with this motivation. It works on the basis that >the upstream is mismanaging their existing IP space and therefore cannot >supply it. It can also happened that the upstream do not have enough space available to allocate to the event ... and could not justify requesting that space for temporary allocation from AfriNIC. ... or just that there is no LIR in a country where Workshop will be held ... etc! >I would rather see the inherent problem addressed. ie. Why does the >upstream not have sufficient addresses? Is there a problem with AfriNIC >that is making it impossible for them to obtain sufficient address space? >Are they in need of training on how to manage their IP's and apply for >more? If so is AfriNIC doing enough in that regard. I think IP address is allocated based on immediate need and planed growth expectation, normally not more that 3 years! So ISP will always get what they need from AfriNIC...but you can not justify allocation form AfriNIC only based on potential temporary allocation! - a. From alan at futureperfect.co.za Tue Apr 26 10:53:10 2005 From: alan at futureperfect.co.za (Alan Levin) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Policy proposal: IPv4 allocation to End Users In-Reply-To: References: <200504171837.35934.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> <008201c549c5$93a20120$0a1929c4@groglet> Message-ID: hi, On 26 Apr 2005, at 01:50, Bill Woodcock wrote: > The approach we've been talking about in ARIN is to find a reasonable > "cap" number. That is, to begin with a liberal policy (like /24 > minimum > allocation) but only up to a certain number of allocations (like 250 or > 500 of them) which is not enough, even if replicated in other regions, > to > cause routers to fall over in great numbers. This would have the > effect > of creating another, African-specific, "swamp" of /24s. They would be > filtered out of the routing table by some people, which would make them > less valuable than larger allocations, but they might meet some > people's > needs, and they wouldn't become a big problem. Moreover, by being > liberal > up-front, you might find that you address a strong need of a small > number > of organizations, without creating any difficulty for anyone else. For > instance, you might allocate a block of 512 /24s, and get a "run" on > them > initially, allocating 100 in the first few months, and then five years > later, you might find that you'd only allocated another 100... No > problem, it takes care of those who need it, without creating any big > issue for anyone else. > One approach to think about. I think this sounds most attractive and useful for our region! I also hope that we will be able to recover some of the "swamp" that is currently unused and already resides in Africa. regards, Alan From apb at cequrux.com Tue Apr 26 11:36:01 2005 From: apb at cequrux.com (Alan Barrett) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Guidelines for Temporary Assignments/Allocations'sproposal In-Reply-To: <00b301c549c8$26c24580$0a1929c4@groglet> References: <200504161505.21885.aalain@trstech.net> <00b301c549c8$26c24580$0a1929c4@groglet> Message-ID: <20050426093601.GC18284@apb-laptoy.apb.alt.za> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Gregory Massel wrote: > >In some circumstances, organisations may require IP resources for a > >certain period of time, usually one month and less. This could be for > >exhibitions, conferences, conventions, etc. > > This really concerns me. Assignments/Allocations generally take quite > some time to evaluate. They are also based on a co-ordinated long-term > usage history and future usage plan. Yes, sure, but there's much less need to be careful with temporary assignments. If you know that the space will be returned in a month or three, then it doesn't matter much if the temporary assignment is larger than it really needed to be. > Once addresses are used, they can often be subject to blacklisting > (particularly if hosts are vulnerable to hacking, spam, etc). This means > that it is often extremely unsatisfactory for an organisation to receive > addresses already used by another. This is exaccerbated further by the fact > that short-term assignments don't allow extended periods to do the > necessary audits and clean-ups. This problem can be mitigated by using a special pool for temporary assignments. > >3.2 Commercial Use Prohibited > > > >If there is any evidence that the temporary resource is being used > >for commercial purposes, or is being used for any activities not > >documented in the original description provided above, AfriNIC > >reserves the right to immediately withdraw the resource and reassign > >it to the free pool. > > This conflicts with the statement of intent. A conference, exhibition, > etc is generally a commercial activity. This needs to be clarified. I agree. The user of the address space should used it for what they said it should be used for, and should be used only for a short time, but there does not need to be any restriction on commercial use. > >Incentive: > >In Africa Internet is still a growing technology and time by time > >there are high level trainings and event related to Internet > >awareness. In most of the case the local hosting organisation > >do not have enough IP address to provide to the workshop > >Infrastructure, resulting to intensives NAT usage. To avoid this, > >AfriNIC should be able to provide temporary address space under > >some specific conditions. This policy will allow AfriNIC to do that. > > There is a big problem with this motivation. It works on the basis that the > upstream is mismanaging their existing IP space and therefore cannot supply > it. Even if the upstream is not mismanaging anything, a temporary event can easily require more address resources than the connectivity provider has available. I see an clear need for temporary assignments for this sort of thing. (For example, how many LIRs do you know that could temporarily assign say 10 AS numbers to a training workshop?) > I would rather see the inherent problem addressed. ie. Why does the > upstream not have sufficient addresses? Is there a problem with AfriNIC > that is making it impossible for them to obtain sufficient address space? > Are they in need of training on how to manage their IP's and apply for > more? If so is AfriNIC doing enough in that regard. There are certainly problems in this regard too. Many providers seem to be under the impression that it's difficult to get sufficient address space, and as a result of that impression, they do not even apply for sufficient address space. > Ultimately, if LIRs are managing their space correctly and the RIR > (AfriNIC) is processing the LIR's requests reasonably and fairly, then the > LIR should always have sufficient free space for temporary assignments. No, the conclusion does not follow from the premises. Temporary events can be very large relative to the LIRs usual customer pool. --apb (Alan Barrett) From gregm at datapro.co.za Thu Apr 28 11:23:18 2005 From: gregm at datapro.co.za (Gregory Massel) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Guidelines for TemporaryAssignments/Allocations'sproposal References: <200504161505.21885.aalain@trstech.net><00b301c549c8$26c24580$0a1929c4@groglet> <6.1.2.0.2.20050426020345.0315fd60@pop.gmail.com> Message-ID: <004701c54bd4$4e704e20$0a1929c4@groglet> > I agree with you but this temporary allocation space will be done > from a special address pool ... and event when returned, they are > put in quarantine for some time before being reallocated (12 months?)! A number of blacklists do not automatically delist addresses after a long period. They only do so on complaints. This policy is also highly open to abuse by spammers. A less prescriptive application procedure (easier to fudge the application) for recyclable addresses. > But in the case they are not (like AFNOG, RALL etc...) I think this > is addressed somewhere in the proposal where it is stated that AfriNIC > may charge for that..(that is apply for commercial training for > instance) Now I really disagree! With due respect, why should AFNOG, RALL,etc have more right to obtain IP's for a conference then a commercial exhibition? (eg. Auto Africa, WineX, etc.) If this proposal is going to be implemented, I see no reason why it should exclude commercial conferences. It should apply to all. Similarly, if it is going to be implemented, I'd strongly suggest allowing temporary allocations for experimental use as well. > It can also happened that the upstream do not have enough space > available to allocate to the event ... and could not justify > requesting that space for temporary allocation from AfriNIC. Realistically how much space does an event need? Seldom more than /24! I just think we need to consider how an ISP small enough that they don't have a /24 spare can have sufficient spare bandwidth to support 254 concurrent users. Also, if it is in the nature of the ISP to provide services that include hosting conferences, then surely this should be stated in their application and as part of their requirements. Remember, no assignment by an LIR is permanent. They assign for the duration of contract with their customer. If they're in the business of short-term contracts, then they need to apply for sufficient address space. They should be able to give any one of their existing conferences/short-term customers as an example. I really think that the responsibility for short-term assignments should rest with the LIR. It is their customer, they can take responsibility for addresses that are abused. It is wrong of them to say they do not have enough address space when all they need to do is apply for more from AfriNIC, citing their existing re-assignment information and their immediate requirements for new customers (whether short- or long-term). > ... or just that there is no LIR in a country where Workshop > will be held ... etc! Not acceptable. If the ISP is not an LIR, they are obtaining address space from an upstream who is an LIR. Either way, there exists a perfectly valid mechanism for applying for address space based on accurate re-assignment information and adequate justification. They can apply to their upstream, who in turn can apply to AfriNIC. And the country aspect to it is also irrelevent because ultimately the entire globe is served by various RIRs. > I think IP address is allocated based on immediate need and > planed growth expectation, normally not more that 3 years! > So ISP will always get what they need from AfriNIC...but you > can not justify allocation form AfriNIC only based on potential > temporary allocation! I agree if you include the word 'potential'. But I'd be horrified if AfriNIC made temporary allocations baded on 'potential' customers as well. One can justify an allocation from AfriNIC based on both your immediate and future needs. If your immediate and future need is to provide addresses to conferences and you can show that (either by demonstrating an example of a previous conference you've hosted or a future one you are hosting), AfriNIC should provide a permanent allocation that takes into consideration your entire business, including short-term customers. There is such an unfortunate belief accross Africa that ISPs cannot obtain address space that they need for their valid requirements. This is partly because of monopolistic telcos or LIRs withholding additional space and the fact that they did not meet the minimum criteria in the past. I think we need to address those problems. Maybe an appropriate action will be for AfriNIC to withhold additional address space (or even reclaim existing space) from any LIR that withholds from its customers despite adequate justification on the basis that the LIR is mismanaging their addresses! --Greg From gregm at datapro.co.za Thu Apr 28 11:28:05 2005 From: gregm at datapro.co.za (Gregory Massel) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Policy proposal: IPv4 allocation to End Users References: <200504171837.35934.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz><008201c549c5$93a20120$0a1929c4@groglet> <6.1.2.0.2.20050426015813.03175e88@pop.gmail.com> Message-ID: <004801c54bd4$9567b980$0a1929c4@groglet> >>While I don't object to this in the case of critical infrastructure, I >>question why an end-user should require provider independent space instead >>of provider aggregatable space. > > Because they don't qualify for becoming LIR. But do need > their own IP block for justifiable reason. I would like to see more clarity on what constitutes a "justifiable reason." I agree that critical infrastructure is one such reason. Some might argue that multi-homing is another (although this is also dubious given that one can announce both a supernet and a subnet thereof). I feel that it would be of much better for both the applicant and AfriNIC if it was clearer what justifications are reasonable. This would save both the applicant and AfriNIC from spurious applications and claims of unfair treatment. --Greg From mje at posix.co.za Thu Apr 28 14:54:40 2005 From: mje at posix.co.za (Mark Elkins) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Guidelines for TemporaryAssignments/Allocations'sproposal In-Reply-To: <004701c54bd4$4e704e20$0a1929c4@groglet> References: <200504161505.21885.aalain@trstech.net> <00b301c549c8$26c24580$0a1929c4@groglet> <6.1.2.0.2.20050426020345.0315fd60@pop.gmail.com> <004701c54bd4$4e704e20$0a1929c4@groglet> Message-ID: <1114692880.32670.69.camel@mje99.posix.co.za> Hi Gents (same old folk) > > But in the case they are not (like AFNOG, RALL etc...) I think this > > is addressed somewhere in the proposal where it is stated that AfriNIC > > may charge for that..(that is apply for commercial training for > > instance) > > Now I really disagree! With due respect, why should AFNOG, RALL,etc have > more right to obtain IP's for a conference then a commercial exhibition? > (eg. Auto Africa, WineX, etc.) > > If this proposal is going to be implemented, I see no reason why it should > exclude commercial conferences. It should apply to all. As stated in the Open Forum time in Maputo, I would have loved to have been able to get temporary address space for the ICANN convention in Nov/Dec 2004. I really needed a /22 (or better) and ASN. We were multi-homed to SAIX and UUNET (10-ish Mb each). Both gave me /23's - which looked OK initially - but we ran out of DHCP addresses a couple of times... (we had both all the delegates, and all the Hotels other residence on the net).... I see no reason why an AfNOG/AfriNIC type meeting could easily also have multiple LIR's providing transit, whist a separate service carries connectivity to a local IAX.... the sort of setup that AfNOG attendees need to be able to be trained in themselves... Meanwhile, the training folk need a couple of real ASN's, and other net-route-able address space. I would like to think that most IT type shows (Afnog/ICANN - etc) would probably be (technically) run by people that most people on this list would know - so they should be allocated from a pool of addresses labelled "un-lightly to be blacklisted". Talking to the APNIC people, they re-allocate the same addresses year after year to the same events and so far have not had any trouble. This makes preparation of equipment easier (last years configs still lying around).. For other (potentially "once-off" events) - use different pools? > Similarly, if it is going to be implemented, I'd strongly suggest allowing > temporary allocations for experimental use as well. Agreed - and often these would be much longer term allocations - which should be no problem. > > It can also happened that the upstream do not have enough space > > available to allocate to the event ... and could not justify > > requesting that space for temporary allocation from AfriNIC. > > Realistically how much space does an event need? Seldom more than /24! I > just think we need to consider how an ISP small enough that they don't have > a /24 spare can have sufficient spare bandwidth to support 254 concurrent > users. Also, if it is in the nature of the ISP to provide services that > include hosting conferences, then surely this should be stated in their > application and as part of their requirements. Remember, no assignment by an > LIR is permanent. They assign for the duration of contract with their > customer. If they're in the business of short-term contracts, then they need > to apply for sufficient address space. They should be able to give any one > of their existing conferences/short-term customers as an example. > > I really think that the responsibility for short-term assignments should > rest with the LIR. It is their customer, they can take responsibility for > addresses that are abused. It is wrong of them to say they do not have > enough address space when all they need to do is apply for more from > AfriNIC, citing their existing re-assignment information and their immediate > requirements for new customers (whether short- or long-term). > > > ... or just that there is no LIR in a country where Workshop > > will be held ... etc! > > Not acceptable. If the ISP is not an LIR, they are obtaining address space > from an upstream who is an LIR. Either way, there exists a perfectly valid > mechanism for applying for address space based on accurate re-assignment > information and adequate justification. They can apply to their upstream, > who in turn can apply to AfriNIC. > > And the country aspect to it is also irrelevent because ultimately the > entire globe is served by various RIRs. > > > I think IP address is allocated based on immediate need and > > planed growth expectation, normally not more that 3 years! > > So ISP will always get what they need from AfriNIC...but you > > can not justify allocation form AfriNIC only based on potential > > temporary allocation! > > I agree if you include the word 'potential'. But I'd be horrified if AfriNIC > made temporary allocations baded on 'potential' customers as well. > > One can justify an allocation from AfriNIC based on both your immediate and > future needs. If your immediate and future need is to provide addresses to > conferences and you can show that (either by demonstrating an example of a > previous conference you've hosted or a future one you are hosting), AfriNIC > should provide a permanent allocation that takes into consideration your > entire business, including short-term customers. > > > There is such an unfortunate belief accross Africa that ISPs cannot obtain > address space that they need for their valid requirements. This is partly > because of monopolistic telcos or LIRs withholding additional space and the > fact that they did not meet the minimum criteria in the past. I think we > need to address those problems. Maybe an appropriate action will be for > AfriNIC to withhold additional address space (or even reclaim existing > space) from any LIR that withholds from its customers despite adequate > justification on the basis that the LIR is mismanaging their addresses! > > --Greg -- . . ___. .__ Posix Systems - Sth Africa. e.164 VOIP ready /| /| / /__ mje@posix.co.za - Mark J Elkins, Cisco CCIE / |/ |ARK \_/ /__ LKINS Tel: +27 12 807 0590 Cell: +27 82 601 0496 From dogwallah at gmail.com Thu Apr 28 17:23:20 2005 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Guidelines for TemporaryAssignments/Allocations'sproposal In-Reply-To: <004701c54bd4$4e704e20$0a1929c4@groglet> References: <200504161505.21885.aalain@trstech.net> <00b301c549c8$26c24580$0a1929c4@groglet> <6.1.2.0.2.20050426020345.0315fd60@pop.gmail.com> <004701c54bd4$4e704e20$0a1929c4@groglet> Message-ID: hello all, Those in Mauputo know that I think this is a useful policy, I will try to summarise my reasons and reax to objections on list. This (temporary need) is a corner case, but one that needs to be addressed. There are (and have been) events in Africa which would like to use their own IP space. They should be able to get an End User (provider independent) block if they want. This would allow for multihoming, control of their reverse and routing, etc. Using a PA block will not always allow this. On 4/28/05, Gregory Massel wrote: > > I agree with you but this temporary allocation space will be done > > from a special address pool ... and event when returned, they are > > put in quarantine for some time before being reallocated (12 months?)! > > A number of blacklists do not automatically delist addresses after a long > period. They only do so on complaints. This policy is also highly open to > abuse by spammers. A less prescriptive application procedure (easier to > fudge the application) for recyclable addresses. The above might be true in theory, but the other RIRs with temp. ass. policies have not reported these problems with temporary assignments. As always, YMMV. In fact, some conference organisers are quite happy to use a block that has been in use the week before by another conference. Nevertheless, quarantine doesn't cost anything and is generally a good idea. As for the spammers theory, again, this doesn't seem to be the case in practice in other regions. If abuse happens, the community can always amend the policy as and when needed. > > > But in the case they are not (like AFNOG, RALL etc...) I think this > > is addressed somewhere in the proposal where it is stated that AfriNIC > > may charge for that..(that is apply for commercial training for > > instance) > > Now I really disagree! With due respect, why should AFNOG, RALL,etc have > more right to obtain IP's for a conference then a commercial exhibition? > (eg. Auto Africa, WineX, etc.) As I read the policy they have the same ?`right``. The policy seems to be flexible enough to allow for some discretion by the registration svcs staff in re: payment. I don?t have a problem with this if it allows AfriNIC to charge commercial users for IP space, as everyone else is charged in the current funding model. I have no problem with giving RS staff discretion to make exceptions either. I understand why some will see this as strange, however the merit outweighs any inequity in my mind. > > If this proposal is going to be implemented, I see no reason why it should > exclude commercial conferences. It should apply to all. It doesn?t exclude commercial activities, but I agree, the wording could be misunderstood by some. How about: -------------------------------------------------- 3.2 Commercial Use Prohibited If there is any evidence that the temporary resource is being used for commercial purposes or any activities that were not documented in the original description provided above, AfriNIC reserves the right to immediately withdraw the resource and reassign it to the free pool. --------------------------------------------------- Does that sound better? > > Similarly, if it is going to be implemented, I'd strongly suggest allowing > temporary allocations for experimental use as well. "2.0 Documenting the temporary activity" does use the term experiments, so they are allowed in this policy as well. > > It can also happened that the upstream do not have enough space > > available to allocate to the event ... and could not justify > > requesting that space for temporary allocation from AfriNIC. > > Realistically how much space does an event need? Seldom more than /24! I yes, probably true, however, this policy is about corner cases, so there will be exceptions to the above, and they should be allowed for in some way. This policy does that. > just think we need to consider how an ISP small enough that they don't have > a /24 spare can have sufficient spare bandwidth to support 254 concurrent > users. Also, if it is in the nature of the ISP to provide services that > include hosting conferences, then surely this should be stated in their > application and as part of their requirements. Remember, no assignment by an > LIR is permanent. They assign for the duration of contract with their > customer. If they're in the business of short-term contracts, then they need > to apply for sufficient address space. They should be able to give any one > of their existing conferences/short-term customers as an example. Do you have a spare /16 for such a customer? How about a spare /32 v6 block? I think most do not, and this is the utility of this policy. (snip) > > Not acceptable. If the ISP is not an LIR, they are obtaining address space > from an upstream who is an LIR. Either way, there exists a perfectly valid > mechanism for applying for address space based on accurate re-assignment > information and adequate justification. They can apply to their upstream, > who in turn can apply to AfriNIC. see multihoming above. If an event wants to have 3 providers, and 2 of them refuse to route the LIRs space (or the LIR refuses to allow the other two to route their space), then the perfectly valid mechanism breaks down for this user. One size does not fit all. (snip) > need to address those problems. Maybe an appropriate action will be for > AfriNIC to withhold additional address space (or even reclaim existing > space) from any LIR that withholds from its customers despite adequate > justification on the basis that the LIR is mismanaging their addresses! > This is another sort of policy altogether and deserves it?s own discussion. ,-) What happens if no LIR can provide appropriate v6 addressing to the Tunis WGIG meeting (for whatever reason). This might be seen as a failure of the current IP distribution scheme, which would be unhelpful in terms of promoting AfriNIC as the sole IP registry in Africa This may be a layer 9 thing, but another reason to adopt this policy AFAIAC. Thanks Alain for putting it forward. Cheers, McTim nic-hdl: TMCG From dogwallah at gmail.com Fri Apr 29 22:59:04 2005 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Policy proposal: IPv4 allocation to End Users In-Reply-To: <008201c549c5$93a20120$0a1929c4@groglet> References: <200504171837.35934.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> <008201c549c5$93a20120$0a1929c4@groglet> Message-ID: Gents, Apologies for multiple posts coming up, but I would like to make a point or two about each of your mails. On 4/25/05, Gregory Massel wrote: > /24 ? > > This seems to be a bit out of line with the other RIRs and given the current > exponential growth of the global routing table, may need reconsideration. > A route is a route, whether it is /30, /24 or /14, it's still one route. > The proposed policy doesn't make it clear if this applies only to critical > infrastructure or if that is simply one example. It is clear to me that it applies to any and all. > > b) Justification of an immediate need of at less 50% of total requested > > size based on its Network Infrastructure. Eg: new Company. I think the above should read "at least 50%..." just a typo? -- Cheers, McTim nic-hdl: TMCG From dogwallah at gmail.com Fri Apr 29 23:03:27 2005 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Policy proposal: IPv4 allocation to End Users In-Reply-To: References: <200504171837.35934.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> <008201c549c5$93a20120$0a1929c4@groglet> Message-ID: Hi Woody, On 4/26/05, Bill Woodcock wrote: > One approach to think about. Thought about, a "cap" may encourage a "land rush" on End User space. My opinion is AfriNIC community either allows PI (End User) space or doesn't. I'm not in favor of half measures. Cheers, McTim nic-hdl: TMCG From dogwallah at gmail.com Fri Apr 29 23:13:27 2005 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Policy proposal: IPv4 allocation to End Users In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20050426015813.03175e88@pop.gmail.com> References: <200504171837.35934.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> <008201c549c5$93a20120$0a1929c4@groglet> <6.1.2.0.2.20050426015813.03175e88@pop.gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi again, On 4/26/05, Adiel A. Akplogan wrote: > At 20:35 25/04/2005 +0200, you wrote: > >/24 ? > > > >This seems to be a bit out of line with the other RIRs and given the > >current exponential growth of the global routing table, may need > >reconsideration. > > No Gregory, all other RIR do assign /24 PI space to end-user. or longer prefixes (193/8 has a minimum assignment size of /29 IIRC). But /24 seems rational becasue the policy thoughtfully says: "The requesting End users must a)Show either an existing efficient utilization of at less /25 from their upstream provider. b)Justification of an immediate need of at less 50% of total requested size based on its Network Infrastructure. Eg: new Company." This encourages conservation by ensuring that much of the space will be in use immediately. > The routing issue is more about the upstream provider willing > to announce it or not. ACK, announcing a more specific of an LIRs PA block isn't always appreciated by the PA holder. > And the PI space supporting document > do WARN small PI space size requesters about the risk of not > beeing able to make it routed by their upstream provider. ACK, no space is guaranteed to be routable by any RIR, be it PI or PA. Cheers, McTim nic-hdl: TMCG From dogwallah at gmail.com Sat Apr 30 00:08:02 2005 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Policy proposal: IPv4 allocation to End Users In-Reply-To: <004801c54bd4$9567b980$0a1929c4@groglet> References: <200504171837.35934.mtinka@africaonline.co.sz> <008201c549c5$93a20120$0a1929c4@groglet> <6.1.2.0.2.20050426015813.03175e88@pop.gmail.com> <004801c54bd4$9567b980$0a1929c4@groglet> Message-ID: Hi again, On 4/28/05, Gregory Massel wrote: > > Because they don't qualify for becoming LIR. But do need > > their own IP block for justifiable reason. > > I would like to see more clarity on what constitutes a "justifiable reason." If the community wants to encourage use of public addressing in Africa, then "I want to use public IPs but am not a big enough ISP to become an LIR" is reason enough in my book. This allows them to support AfriNIC financially, control their own space and connect customers using public IPs. > > I agree that critical infrastructure is one such reason. Here is my paraphrasing/reading of the "CI" clause: --- CI may not fit in the criteria of /25 in use and immediate need of 50% of prefix, but they may need/want PI, and as CI, they will be an exception to the general rule. --- The 2 exceptions are clearly defined. However, we should be open to the idea of adding more categories to this list in future if needed. Some consider Google/Akamai, etc as CI as well. > I feel that it would be of much better for both the applicant and AfriNIC if > it was clearer what justifications are reasonable. This would save both the > applicant and AfriNIC from spurious applications and claims of unfair > treatment. It is generally useful to make policies a bit vague on purpose to allow the AfriNIC Hostmasters latitude. This one is specific enough on "justification" IMO, especially since /25 & 50 are hard limits. If I was Hostie, this would be my interpretation: "IXP's get /24 PI space if they meet the definition of IXP in the policy, cctld's get it if they want it." Of course, the word allocation is used throughout, when "assignment" is more appropriate (unless I missed smt). I would ask for this change. I agree with Alan, I think it is useful and generally support it. It is also quite skillfully written in re: balancing competing goals of aggregation and conservation while taking into consideration the state of the market/AfriNIC's need for sustainable growth/CI "special" needs, etc. Thanks Mark! -- Cheers, McTim nic-hdl: TMCG From apb at cequrux.com Mon Aug 1 15:25:39 2005 From: apb at cequrux.com (Alan Barrett) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Proposed policy: IPv6 allocation from IANA to RIRs Message-ID: <20050801132539.GA23581@apb-laptoy.apb.alt.za> In my capacity as a member of the ASO Address Council appointed by the AfriNIC Board, and in terms of my responsibilities as recorded in clause 2 of attachment A of the ICANN ASO Mou (http://nro.icann.org/docs/aso-mou2004.html), I hereby submit the appended proposal in terms of the AfriNIC policy development process (http://www.afrinic.net/pdp.htm), and request that this proposal be placed on the agenda of the next AfriNIC open policy meeting. This is a proposed global policy, which is intended to be handled in terms of attachment A of the ICANN ASO MoU (http://nro.icann.org/docs/aso-mou2004.html). --apb (Alan Barrett) ---- AfriNIC Proposed policy: Allocation of IPv6 Address Space by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) to Regional Internet Registries Submitted by: A P Barrett Date: 1 August 2005 Related policies and proposals in other regions: ARIN: http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2004_8.html APNIC: http://www.apnic.net/docs/policy/proposals/prop-005-v004.html LACNIC: http://lacnic.net/documentos/lacnicvii/POLITICA-IPV6-IANA-RIR.pdf RIPE-NCC: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ipv6.html Note: The wording below is identical to the wording of ARIN policy 2004-8. Some of the other RIRs are considering proposals with similar but not identical wording. Policy statement: This document describes the policy governing the allocation of IPv6 address space from the IANA to the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs). This document does not stipulate performance requirements in the provision of services by IANA to an RIR in accordance with this policy. Such requirements will be specified by appropriate agreements between ICANN and the NRO. 1. Allocation Principles The unit of IPv6 allocation (and therefore the minimum IPv6 allocation) from IANA to an RIR is a /12 The IANA will allocate sufficient IPv6 address space to the RIRs to support their registration needs for at least an 18 month period. The IANA will allow for the RIRs to apply their own respective chosen allocation and reservation strategies in order to ensure the efficiency and efficacy of their work. 2. Initial Allocations On inception of this policy, each current RIR with less than a /12 unallocated address space, shall receive an IPv6 allocation from IANA Any new RIR shall, on recognition by ICANN receive an IPv6 allocation from the IANA 3. Additional Allocations A RIR is eligible to receive additional IPv6 address space from the IANA when either of the following conditions are met. The RIR's AVAILABLE SPACE of IPv6 addresses is less than 50% of a /12. The RIR's AVAILABLE SPACE of IPv6 addresses is less than its established NECESSARY SPACE for the following 9 months. In either case, IANA shall make a single IPv6 allocation, sufficient to satisfy the established NECESSARY SPACE of the RIR for an 18 month period. 3.1 Calculation of AVAILABLE SPACE The AVAILABLE SPACE of IPv6 addresses of a RIR shall be determined as follows: AVAILABLE SPACE = CURRENTLY FREE ADDRESSES + RESERVATIONS EXPIRING DURING THE FOLLOWING 3 MONTHS - FRAGMENTED SPACE FRAGMENTED SPACE is determined as the total amount of available blocks smaller than the RIR's minimum allocation size within the RIR's currently available stock. 3.2 Calculation of NECESSARY SPACE If the applying Regional Internet Registry does not establish any special needs for the period concerned, NECESSARY SPACE shall be determined as follows: NECESSARY SPACE = AVERAGE NUMBER OF ADDRESSES ALLOCATED MONTHLY DURING THE PAST 6 MONTHS * LENGTH OF PERIOD IN MONTHS If the applying RIR anticipates that due to certain special needs the rate of allocation for the period concerned will be different from the previous 6 months, it may determine its NECESSARY SPACE as follows: Calculate NECESSARY SPACE as its total needs for that period according to its projection and based on the special facts that justify these needs. Submit a clear and detailed justification of the above mentioned projection (Item A). If the justification is based on the allocation tendency prepared by the Regional Internet Registry, data explaining said tendency must be enclosed. If the justification is based on the application of one or more of the Regional Internet Registry's new allocation policies, an impact analysis of the new policy/policies must be enclosed. If the justification is based on external factors such as new infrastructure, new services within the region, technological advances or legal issues, the corresponding analysis must be enclosed together with references to information sources that will allow verification of the data. If IANA does not have elements that clearly question the Regional Internet Registry's projection, the special needs projected for the following 18 months, indicated in Item A above, shall be considered valid. 4. Announcement of IANA Allocations The IANA, the NRO, and the RIRs will make announcements and update their respective web sites regarding an allocation made by the IANA to an RIR. ICANN and the NRO will establish administrative procedures to manage this process. (end) From alan at futureperfect.co.za Thu Sep 1 01:03:25 2005 From: alan at futureperfect.co.za (Alan Levin) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Fwd: [afnog] IP addresses returned to AfriNIC by TENET References: <6.1.2.0.2.20050831140632.030e28a8@mail.afrinic.net> Message-ID: <8781F94B-2E8B-4B7C-BA48-F78CB568C54D@futureperfect.co.za> Hi, As I understand, these were swamp space, > 192.96.0.0/16; > 196.6.0.0/16; > 196.10.0.0/16; > 196.11.0.0/16; > 196.13.0.0/16 and > 198.54.0.0/16. Are they still made up of numerous globally routable /24's? Is it worth considering a specific allocation policy for this space? regards, Alan From dogwallah at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 11:47:24 2005 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Fwd: [afnog] IP addresses returned to AfriNIC by TENET In-Reply-To: <8781F94B-2E8B-4B7C-BA48-F78CB568C54D@futureperfect.co.za> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20050831140632.030e28a8@mail.afrinic.net> <8781F94B-2E8B-4B7C-BA48-F78CB568C54D@futureperfect.co.za> Message-ID: HI Alan, On 9/1/05, Alan Levin wrote: > Hi, > > As I understand, these were swamp space, looks like it to me as well. > > > 192.96.0.0/16; > > 196.6.0.0/16; > > 196.10.0.0/16; > > 196.11.0.0/16; > > 196.13.0.0/16 and > > 198.54.0.0/16. > > Are they still made up of numerous globally routable /24's? > Is it worth considering a specific allocation policy for this space? I think not. Every corner case doesn't need a specific policy IMHO. If we make specific policies about every situation, then it may tie the hands of the NIC staff somewhere down the line. I think it best to maintain a general set of guidelines for flexibility sake. TENET showed good netizenship here, if we have a "swamp policy", maybe it will inhibit others from doing the same. Having said that, I am willing to listen to anything you may have in mind in re policy text. -- Cheers, McTim nic-hdl: TMCG From mje at posix.co.za Thu Sep 1 13:17:59 2005 From: mje at posix.co.za (Mark Elkins) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Fwd: [afnog] IP addresses returned to AfriNIC by TENET In-Reply-To: References: <6.1.2.0.2.20050831140632.030e28a8@mail.afrinic.net> <8781F94B-2E8B-4B7C-BA48-F78CB568C54D@futureperfect.co.za> Message-ID: <1125573479.15872.74.camel@mje99.posix.co.za> Hey guys - I have a bunch of /24's sitting in 192.96.X.X .. so lets not talk about "returning IP space" just yet... Anything in 192/8 is worth its weight in Gold (except 192.168. ? ;-) - as /24's are world routable (Swamp) (not sure which other /8's are swamp). Whilst thinking about what Adiel said about there being no aggregation of the space, I'd love to swap some (multiple) of the /24 address space I have with one particular address (192.96.24.0/24) - so that I end up with a contiguous block (/22) on the appropriate bit boundary.... bit of renumbering on my side - but worth the bother. On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 12:47 +0300, McTim wrote: > HI Alan, > > On 9/1/05, Alan Levin wrote: > > Hi, > > > > As I understand, these were swamp space, > > looks like it to me as well. > > > > > > 192.96.0.0/16; > > > 196.6.0.0/16; > > > 196.10.0.0/16; > > > 196.11.0.0/16; > > > 196.13.0.0/16 and > > > 198.54.0.0/16. > > > > Are they still made up of numerous globally routable /24's? > > Is it worth considering a specific allocation policy for this space? > > I think not. Every corner case doesn't need a specific policy IMHO. > > If we make specific policies about every situation, then it may tie > the hands of the NIC staff somewhere down the line. I think it best to > maintain a general set of guidelines for flexibility sake. > > TENET showed good netizenship here, if we have a "swamp policy", maybe > it will inhibit others from doing the same. > > Having said that, I am willing to listen to anything you may have in > mind in re policy text. > -- . . ___. .__ Posix Systems - Sth Africa. e.164 VOIP ready /| /| / /__ mje@posix.co.za - Mark J Elkins, Cisco CCIE / |/ |ARK \_/ /__ LKINS Tel: +27 12 807 0590 Cell: +27 82 601 0496 From adiel at akplogan.com Fri Sep 2 00:27:45 2005 From: adiel at akplogan.com (Adiel A. Akplogan) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Fwd: [afnog] IP addresses returned to AfriNIC by TENET In-Reply-To: <1125573479.15872.74.camel@mje99.posix.co.za> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20050831140632.030e28a8@mail.afrinic.net> <8781F94B-2E8B-4B7C-BA48-F78CB568C54D@futureperfect.co.za> <1125573479.15872.74.camel@mje99.posix.co.za> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20050902001736.062f9ec0@pop.gmail.com> At 13:17 01/09/2005 +0200, you wrote: >Hey guys - I have a bunch of /24's sitting in 192.96.X.X .. so lets not >talk about "returning IP space" just yet... Anything in 192/8 is worth >its weight in Gold (except 192.168. ? ;-) - as /24's are world routable >(Swamp) (not sure which other /8's are swamp). Mark, worry not. As said this process will not have effect on IPblock hold by people if they replay to our call to provide proper information for them to be properly register in our whois as 'ASSIGNED PI'. Also no fee will be associated with them [Yet :)] >Whilst thinking about what Adiel said about there being no aggregation >of the space, I'd love to swap some (multiple) of the /24 address space >I have with one particular address (192.96.24.0/24) - so that I end up >with a contiguous block (/22) on the appropriate bit boundary.... bit of >renumbering on my side - but worth the bother. We can work on that direct your concern to hostmaster@afrinic.net and we can how this can be workable. - a. >On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 12:47 +0300, McTim wrote: > > HI Alan, > > > > On 9/1/05, Alan Levin wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > As I understand, these were swamp space, > > > > looks like it to me as well. > > > > > > > > > 192.96.0.0/16; > > > > 196.6.0.0/16; > > > > 196.10.0.0/16; > > > > 196.11.0.0/16; > > > > 196.13.0.0/16 and > > > > 198.54.0.0/16. > > > > > > Are they still made up of numerous globally routable /24's? > > > Is it worth considering a specific allocation policy for this space? > > > > I think not. Every corner case doesn't need a specific policy IMHO. > > > > If we make specific policies about every situation, then it may tie > > the hands of the NIC staff somewhere down the line. I think it best to > > maintain a general set of guidelines for flexibility sake. > > > > TENET showed good netizenship here, if we have a "swamp policy", maybe > > it will inhibit others from doing the same. > > > > Having said that, I am willing to listen to anything you may have in > > mind in re policy text. > > >-- > . . ___. .__ Posix Systems - Sth Africa. e.164 VOIP ready > /| /| / /__ mje@posix.co.za - Mark J Elkins, Cisco CCIE >/ |/ |ARK \_/ /__ LKINS Tel: +27 12 807 0590 Cell: +27 82 601 0496 > >_______________________________________________ >policy-wg mailing list >policy-wg@afrinic.net >http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg From adiel at afrinic.net Fri Sep 2 00:49:16 2005 From: adiel at afrinic.net (Adiel A. Akplogan) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Fwd: [afnog] IP addresses returned to AfriNIC by TENET In-Reply-To: <8781F94B-2E8B-4B7C-BA48-F78CB568C54D@futureperfect.co.za> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20050831140632.030e28a8@mail.afrinic.net> <8781F94B-2E8B-4B7C-BA48-F78CB568C54D@futureperfect.co.za> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20050902004521.0659fec0@mail.afrinic.net> >As I understand, these were swamp space, yes. >>192.96.0.0/16; >>196.6.0.0/16; >>196.10.0.0/16; >>196.11.0.0/16; >>196.13.0.0/16 and >>198.54.0.0/16. > >Are they still made up of numerous globally routable /24's? yes, and they will be updated (or register) in our DB as PI space with the information of the holder of these /24. In any case these block (unused space) will be putted in quarantine as commonly done by other RIRs. - a. From alan at futureperfect.co.za Mon Sep 5 09:27:40 2005 From: alan at futureperfect.co.za (Alan Levin) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Fwd: [afnog] IP addresses returned to AfriNIC by TENET In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20050902004521.0659fec0@mail.afrinic.net> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20050831140632.030e28a8@mail.afrinic.net> <8781F94B-2E8B-4B7C-BA48-F78CB568C54D@futureperfect.co.za> <6.1.2.0.2.20050902004521.0659fec0@mail.afrinic.net> Message-ID: Hi, On 02 Sep 2005, at 12:49 AM, Adiel A. Akplogan wrote: >>> 192.96.0.0/16; >>> 196.6.0.0/16; >>> 196.10.0.0/16; >>> 196.11.0.0/16; >>> 196.13.0.0/16 and >>> 198.54.0.0/16. > > In any case these block (unused space) will be putted in quarantine > as commonly done by other RIRs. for how long? aLan From nooriah at afrinic.net Wed Sep 7 13:58:37 2005 From: nooriah at afrinic.net (Nooriah Woozer) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Re: this email In-Reply-To: <004801c5b39d$b7ba1470$f766a855@computer> References: <004801c5b39d$b7ba1470$f766a855@computer> Message-ID: <20050907115152.M431@afrinic.net> Dear Alain AfriNIC is the Internet Registry for Africa and the Indian Ocean region. We allocate and assign internet numbers to members within our service area. Unfortunately, it is not within our means to stop or prevent abuse to/from IP networks operated by our members. All number resources allocated/assigned to our members are publicly available in the AfriNIC whois database reachable at: whois.afrinic.net port 43 OR: http://whois.afrinic.net (web interface) Please query the whois database to get accurate information about the IP address/networks in question. Warm regards, AfriNIC Team -- AfriNIC - The African Network Information Centre e-mail: afrinic-admin@afrinic.net http://www.afrinic.net ________________________________________________ ---------- Original Message ----------- From: "alain" To: , , Cc: Sent: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 13:17:07 +0200 Subject: this email > Hello. > > Sorry for my English.... > > I send this message for you to you indicate that I received your system, of > your address or address of one of your subscribers this message joint and this > a dozen time. > > It is obviously about a message having for goal to steal and swindle people > who it recoive. > > You of it are responsible. > > You are not in France, I regret it because I would carry felt sorry for > immediately in justice. > > I will do it nevertheless by the intermediare CNIL in France. > > I await the immediate suspension of this fraudulent activity of which you are > the motive fluid. > > I await your share an action to remove these frauds. > > Cordially. > > Aalin BARBOT ------- End of Original Message ------- From dogwallah at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 17:45:14 2005 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Re: this email In-Reply-To: <20050907115152.M431@afrinic.net> References: <004801c5b39d$b7ba1470$f766a855@computer> <20050907115152.M431@afrinic.net> Message-ID: hi, Perhaps a web page like this in EN & FR might be more use: http://ripe.net/info/faq/abuse/index.html how's married life treating you? Still honeymooning, I hope ;-) -- Cheers, McTim nic-hdl: TMCG From nooriah at afrinic.net Fri Sep 9 07:37:12 2005 From: nooriah at afrinic.net (Nooriah Woozeer) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Re: this email In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hey Mc Thanks for the link. It was in my favourites ;) Hubby is back in paris :( Hop to c you very soon Nury Nooriah Woozeer-Joomabocus Business and Administrative Assistant AfriNIC Ltd Office 03B3 3rd Floor Eb?ne Cyber Tower Eb?ne Cyber City Mauritius Tel: +230 466 6616 Fax: +230 466 6758 www.afrinic.net -----Original Message----- From: policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net [mailto:policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net] On Behalf Of McTim Sent: 07 September 2005 19:45 To: AfriNIC Policy Working Group List Subject: Re: [policy-wg] Re: this email hi, Perhaps a web page like this in EN & FR might be more use: http://ripe.net/info/faq/abuse/index.html how's married life treating you? Still honeymooning, I hope ;-) -- Cheers, McTim nic-hdl: TMCG _______________________________________________ policy-wg mailing list policy-wg@afrinic.net http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg From nooriah at afrinic.net Fri Sep 9 10:22:19 2005 From: nooriah at afrinic.net (Nooriah Woozeer) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Re: this email In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear All Please accept my sincere apologies for the previous email Best regards Nooriah Woozeer-Joomabocus Business and Administrative Assistant AfriNIC Ltd Office 03B3 3rd Floor Eb?ne Cyber Tower Eb?ne Cyber City Mauritius Tel: +230 466 6616 Fax: +230 466 6758 www.afrinic.net -----Original Message----- From: policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net [mailto:policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net] On Behalf Of McTim Sent: 07 September 2005 19:45 To: AfriNIC Policy Working Group List Subject: Re: [policy-wg] Re: this email hi, Perhaps a web page like this in EN & FR might be more use: http://ripe.net/info/faq/abuse/index.html how's married life treating you? Still honeymooning, I hope ;-) -- Cheers, McTim nic-hdl: TMCG _______________________________________________ policy-wg mailing list policy-wg@afrinic.net http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg From andrew.dul at quark.net Tue Sep 13 04:10:27 2005 From: andrew.dul at quark.net (Andrew Dul) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] ARIN Policy Proposal 2005-4: AfriNIC Recognition Policy Message-ID: <4.0.2.20050912185004.01b90960@mail.quark.net> This policy will be discussed at the upcoming ARIN meeting, if you have any comments regarding this policy proposal we encouage you to post to ppml@arin.net to discuss this issue. Thanks, Andrew ARIN AC > > >### * ### > > >Policy Proposal Name: AfriNIC Recognition Policy > >Author: Andrew Dul > >Policy term: permanent > >Policy statement: Remove section 4.8 entitled "Policy for the African >Portion of the ARIN Region" of the NRPM. > >Rationale: The ARIN BoT recently suspended section 4.8 of the NRPM upon >recognition of AfriNIC as an RIR by ICANN. Section 4.8 of the NRPM >applied only to areas of the ARIN region that are now covered by AfriNIC. > >Timetable for implementation: Within 30 days of ratification by the BoT. > From adiel at afrinic.net Mon Sep 26 19:05:00 2005 From: adiel at afrinic.net (Adiel A. Akplogan) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] AfriNIC-3: Cairo 11-14 December 2005 Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20050926185932.032c4ec0@mail.afrinic.net> Dear colleagues, AfriNIC will have its third public policy meeting in Cairo (Egypt) from 11 to 14 December 2005. This meeting which is part of our policy development process is our second meeting for 2005. It will be held back to back with the first African IPv6 event (hosted by the Egyptian IPv6 Forum). The meeting plan is as follows: 11 December: LIR training (English) Registration already open 12 December: IPv6 Hands on Workshop Registration opening on October 1st 13 December: African IPv6 meeting Presentation on IPv6 and different initiatives in Africa 14 December: AfriNIC public Policy meeting The meeting will be held at: Mena House Oberoi, Pyramids Road, Giza, Egypt http://www.oberoimenahouse.com We are looking forward to seeing you in Cairo. The full agenda and other details about this meeting will be online shortly on the AfriNIC website. In the mean time you, can contact our coordination team at meeting@afrinic.net. Kind regards Adiel A. Akplogan www.afrinic.net From adiel at afrinic.net Mon Sep 26 19:31:51 2005 From: adiel at afrinic.net (Adiel A. Akplogan) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Re: [afrinic-discuss] AfriNIC-3: Cairo 11-14 December 2005 In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20050926185932.032c4ec0@mail.afrinic.net> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20050926185932.032c4ec0@mail.afrinic.net> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20050926192824.0619d838@mail.afrinic.net> >The meeting will be held at: >Mena House Oberoi, >Pyramids Road, Giza, Egypt >http://www.oberoimenahouse.com Some quick information for those who want to reserve their hotel room from now: Accommodation: For hotel reservation, participants are kindly requested to directly contact: Mr. Mohammed Wagdy Assistant Sales Manager Oberoi Hotels and Resorts, Egypt Tel: + (2 02) 377 3222 Fax: + (2 02) 376 7777 email: Sales@Oberoi.com.eg Room rates*, in US Dollars, per night, inclusive of Buffet Breakfast, subject to Service Charge and Taxes, are as follows: Garden Wing: Single Room Garden View: USD 70 Double Room Garden View: USD 80 Single Room Pyramid View: USD 85 Double Room Pyramid View: USD 95 Palace Wing: Palace Single non-Pyramid View: USD 150 Standard Single Pyramid View: USD 175 Executive Suite: USD 500 * Reference should be made to the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (MCIT) to benefit from the above special rates. ** Note that these rate will applied only for a stay during the event period. Adiel A. Akplogan. From enega at uneca.org Mon Sep 26 21:02:14 2005 From: enega at uneca.org (Eskedar Nega) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Eskedar Nega is out of the office. Message-ID: I will be out of the office starting 23/09/2005 and will not return until 30/09/2005. For urgent matters related to the upcoming Dakar, please contact my colleague Mr Assefa Bahta at assefab@uneca.org Pour des questions urgentes relatives ? l'atelier de Dakar du 17-18 octobre 2005, veuillez contacter mon coll?gue Mr Assefa Bahata au courriel: assefab@uneca.org From adiel at afrinic.net Thu Oct 6 21:41:03 2005 From: adiel at afrinic.net (Adiel A. Akplogan) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] AfriNIC-3: Registration is now open. Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20051006213101.06afdb90@mail.afrinic.net> Dear Colleagues, As announced a few days ago, AfriNIC will be having its third public policy meeting (AfriNIC-3) in Cairo (Egypt) on the 14th of December. This event will take place with the first African IPv6 meeting which is to be hosted by the Egyptian IPv6 Task force on the 13th of December. * Registration for both events is now open. http://www.afrinic.net/meetings/afrinic-3/registration.htm You can check information about the meeting by visiting the meeting web page at: http://www.afrinic.net/meeting/afrinic-3 The meeting include two training sessions. An LIR training on the 11th and an IPv6 hands-On training on the 12th of December. Registration for these training sessions is also open on the AfriNIC web site. http://www.afrinic.net/training/registration-cairo.htm For any further information, please contact meeting@afrinic.net or call our office at +230 466 66 16. Regards. Adiel A. Akplogan CEO, AfriNIC www.afrinic.net From adiel at afrinic.net Fri Oct 7 14:34:07 2005 From: adiel at afrinic.net (Adiel A. Akplogan) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Fwd: [afrinic-discuss] Call for Presentation: 1st Africa IPv6 meeting - 13 December 2005 Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20051007143244.03529588@mail.afrinic.net> FYI >Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 14:28:42 +0200 >To: afrinic-discuss@afrinic.net >From: AfriNIC Meeting team >Subject: [afrinic-discuss] Call for Presentation: 1st Africa IPv6 meeting - > 13 December 2005 >X-BeenThere: afrinic-discuss@afrinic.net > >AfriNIC-3 and Africa IPv6 Meeting >================================= > >Call for Presentations during the IPv6 day (13 December). >--------------------------------------------------------- > >AfriNIC and The Egyptian IPv6 Task Force are organizing a two days >Ipv6 event collocated with AfriNIC-3 public policy meeting. > >For the IPv6 meeting which will be held on the 13 December, we invite >applications from people who wish to make a presentation on their IPv6 >experience or any topic related to IPv6 deployment in their country or >region. We also welcome any program suggestions for the day. > >Background >---------- > > AfriNIC is the Regional Internet Registry for Africa and Indian >Ocean. AfriNIC community has expressed during its second public policy >meeting in Maputo (April 2005) the need for more awareness on IPv6 in >the region. > >Following the meeting, a mailing list (afripv6-discuss@afrinic.net) >has been set up for ipv6 related discussions and a project to organize >various IPv6 events across the continent. The Cairo event will be the >first one. > >About the IPv6 conference >------------------------- > >This event aims to provide forum for the coordination and dissemination >of technical information related to Ipv6 development and experience not >only from Africa but also from other regions. > >How to apply >------------ > >If you are interested in making a presentation at the AfriNIC-3 or the >IPv6 day, please submit a proposal as soon as possible, but not later >than 21 October 2005. > >Your submission must include the following information: > > - speaker/presenter name and affiliation, > - email address and phone number, > - proposed title, > - requested time allocation (between 15 and 1 hour) > - an abstract of no more than 200 words > >Deadlines >--------- > > Submission deadline: 21 October 2005 > Notification by: 1 November 2006 > Send Requests to: presentation@afrinic.net > >Timetable of the whole event: >----------------------------- > > AfriNIC LIR training 11 December 2005 > IPv6 hands on training 12 December 2005 > Africa IPv6 day 13 December 2005 > AfriNIC Policy meeting 14 December 2005 > >Kind regards. > > >================ >See you at AfriNIC-3 and AfriIPv6 Meeting >Cairo, Egypt 11-14 December 2005 >www.afrinic.net/meetings/afrinic-3 > > >_______________________________________________ >afrinic-discuss mailing list >afrinic-discuss@afrinic.net >http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/afrinic-discuss From ibyaruhanga at nssfug.org Mon Oct 17 12:03:37 2005 From: ibyaruhanga at nssfug.org (Immy Byaruhanga) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] AfriNIC-3: Cairo 11-14 December 2005 Message-ID: <6ADE7B2FDDD08E4C8637A0C68F1E477839AEB3@dc3.nssfug.org> I would like to attend, please send me registration details Immy Byaruhanga Kampala, Uganda. -----Original Message----- From: policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net [mailto:policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net] On Behalf Of Adiel A. Akplogan Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 8:05 PM To: afrinic-discuss@afrinic.net Cc: policy-wg@afrinic.net; afripv6-discuss@afrinic.net Subject: [policy-wg] AfriNIC-3: Cairo 11-14 December 2005 Dear colleagues, AfriNIC will have its third public policy meeting in Cairo (Egypt) from 11 to 14 December 2005. This meeting which is part of our policy development process is our second meeting for 2005. It will be held back to back with the first African IPv6 event (hosted by the Egyptian IPv6 Forum). The meeting plan is as follows: 11 December: LIR training (English) Registration already open 12 December: IPv6 Hands on Workshop Registration opening on October 1st 13 December: African IPv6 meeting Presentation on IPv6 and different initiatives in Africa 14 December: AfriNIC public Policy meeting The meeting will be held at: Mena House Oberoi, Pyramids Road, Giza, Egypt http://www.oberoimenahouse.com We are looking forward to seeing you in Cairo. The full agenda and other details about this meeting will be online shortly on the AfriNIC website. In the mean time you, can contact our coordination team at meeting@afrinic.net. Kind regards Adiel A. Akplogan www.afrinic.net _______________________________________________ policy-wg mailing list policy-wg@afrinic.net http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg From meeting at afrinic.net Mon Oct 17 13:13:56 2005 From: meeting at afrinic.net (AfriNIC Meeting team) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] AfriNIC-3: Cairo 11-14 December 2005 In-Reply-To: <6ADE7B2FDDD08E4C8637A0C68F1E477839AEB3@dc3.nssfug.org> References: <6ADE7B2FDDD08E4C8637A0C68F1E477839AEB3@dc3.nssfug.org> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20051017130955.0383c130@pop.gmail.com> Dear Immy, The registration details are available at: http://www.afrinic.net/meeting/afrinic-3/registration.htm For any further information about the meeting please visit AfriNIC-3 meeting page at: http://www.afrinic.net/meeting/afrinic-3/index.htm and do not hesitate to contact us at meeting@afrinic.net Kind regards. AfriNIC meeting Team. ================ See you at AfriNIC-3 and AfriIPv6 Meeting Cairo, Egypt 11-14 December 2005 www.afrinic.net/meetings/afrinic-3 >I would like to attend, please send me registration details >Immy Byaruhanga >Kampala, Uganda. > > >-----Original Message----- >From: policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net >[mailto:policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net] On Behalf Of Adiel A. Akplogan >Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 8:05 PM >To: afrinic-discuss@afrinic.net >Cc: policy-wg@afrinic.net; afripv6-discuss@afrinic.net >Subject: [policy-wg] AfriNIC-3: Cairo 11-14 December 2005 > >Dear colleagues, > >AfriNIC will have its third public policy meeting in Cairo (Egypt) >from 11 to 14 December 2005. This meeting which is part of our policy >development process is our second meeting for 2005. It will >be held back to back with the first African IPv6 event (hosted by the >Egyptian IPv6 Forum). > >The meeting plan is as follows: > >11 December: LIR training (English) > Registration already open > >12 December: IPv6 Hands on Workshop > Registration opening on October 1st > >13 December: African IPv6 meeting > Presentation on IPv6 and different initiatives in Africa > >14 December: AfriNIC public Policy meeting > >The meeting will be held at: >Mena House Oberoi, >Pyramids Road, Giza, Egypt >http://www.oberoimenahouse.com > >We are looking forward to seeing you in Cairo. The full agenda >and other details about this meeting will be online shortly on >the AfriNIC website. > >In the mean time you, can contact our coordination team at >meeting@afrinic.net. > >Kind regards > >Adiel A. Akplogan >www.afrinic.net > >_______________________________________________ >policy-wg mailing list >policy-wg@afrinic.net >http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg > >_______________________________________________ >policy-wg mailing list >policy-wg@afrinic.net >http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg ================ See you at AfriNIC-3 and AfriIPv6 Meeting Cairo, Egypt 11-14 December 2005 www.afrinic.net/meetings/afrinic-3 From ibyaruhanga at nssfug.org Mon Oct 17 14:16:06 2005 From: ibyaruhanga at nssfug.org (Immy Byaruhanga) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] AfriNIC-3: Cairo 11-14 December 2005 Message-ID: <6ADE7B2FDDD08E4C8637A0C68F1E477839AED9@dc3.nssfug.org> Thanks Immy Byaruhanga -----Original Message----- From: policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net [mailto:policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net] On Behalf Of AfriNIC Meeting team Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 2:14 PM To: AfriNIC Policy Working Group List; AfriNIC Policy Working Group List; afrinic-discuss@afrinic.net Cc: afripv6-discuss@afrinic.net Subject: RE: [policy-wg] AfriNIC-3: Cairo 11-14 December 2005 Dear Immy, The registration details are available at: http://www.afrinic.net/meeting/afrinic-3/registration.htm For any further information about the meeting please visit AfriNIC-3 meeting page at: http://www.afrinic.net/meeting/afrinic-3/index.htm and do not hesitate to contact us at meeting@afrinic.net Kind regards. AfriNIC meeting Team. ================ See you at AfriNIC-3 and AfriIPv6 Meeting Cairo, Egypt 11-14 December 2005 www.afrinic.net/meetings/afrinic-3 >I would like to attend, please send me registration details >Immy Byaruhanga >Kampala, Uganda. > > >-----Original Message----- >From: policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net >[mailto:policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net] On Behalf Of Adiel A. Akplogan >Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 8:05 PM >To: afrinic-discuss@afrinic.net >Cc: policy-wg@afrinic.net; afripv6-discuss@afrinic.net >Subject: [policy-wg] AfriNIC-3: Cairo 11-14 December 2005 > >Dear colleagues, > >AfriNIC will have its third public policy meeting in Cairo (Egypt) >from 11 to 14 December 2005. This meeting which is part of our policy >development process is our second meeting for 2005. It will >be held back to back with the first African IPv6 event (hosted by the >Egyptian IPv6 Forum). > >The meeting plan is as follows: > >11 December: LIR training (English) > Registration already open > >12 December: IPv6 Hands on Workshop > Registration opening on October 1st > >13 December: African IPv6 meeting > Presentation on IPv6 and different initiatives in Africa > >14 December: AfriNIC public Policy meeting > >The meeting will be held at: >Mena House Oberoi, >Pyramids Road, Giza, Egypt >http://www.oberoimenahouse.com > >We are looking forward to seeing you in Cairo. The full agenda >and other details about this meeting will be online shortly on >the AfriNIC website. > >In the mean time you, can contact our coordination team at >meeting@afrinic.net. > >Kind regards > >Adiel A. Akplogan >www.afrinic.net > >_______________________________________________ >policy-wg mailing list >policy-wg@afrinic.net >http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg > >_______________________________________________ >policy-wg mailing list >policy-wg@afrinic.net >http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg ================ See you at AfriNIC-3 and AfriIPv6 Meeting Cairo, Egypt 11-14 December 2005 www.afrinic.net/meetings/afrinic-3 _______________________________________________ policy-wg mailing list policy-wg@afrinic.net http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg From mouhamet at next.sn Sat Dec 3 22:54:01 2005 From: mouhamet at next.sn (mouhamet@next.sn) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Policy to be discussed in Cairo Message-ID: <4843.209.52.108.183.1133643241.squirrel@www.next.sn> Dear colleagues, The following policies have been proposed and will be discussed in Cairo for a last time before being passed to the Board: o Temporary Assignments & assignments for critical establishments (like IXPs). Policy Affected: None (New) Date: 16-Apr-2005 The proposal defines the policy that AfriNIC will use to assign IP Addresses for temporary use. (Alain Aina) http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/afpol-tmpal200504.htm o Direct/PI Assignments from AfriNIC to end-user organisations. Policy Affected: None (New) Date: 16-Apr-2005 The proposal defines the policy for Provider Independent (PI) IPv4 Assignments to end-user organisations in the AfriNIC region (Mark Tinka). http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/afpol-v4eu200504.htm o Criteria for assignment of AS Numbers. Policy Affected: afpol-as200407-000 Date: 16-Apr-2005 The proposal defines minor changes to the criteria for ASN assignments in the AfriNIC region (Mark Tinka). http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/drafts/afpol-chgasn200508.htm ** Section 4 of the policy document o Global policy for IPv6 Allocation from IANA to RIRs. Policy Affected: None (New) Date: 16-Apr-.2005 This proposal describes the policy governing the allocation of IPv6 address space from the IANA to the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs). This document does not stipulate performance requirements in the provision of services by IANA to an RIR in accordance with this policy. Such requirements will be specified by appropriate agreements between ICANN and the NRO (Alan Barrett). http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/drafts/afpol-glbipv6200508.htm Thanks Mouhamet Diop Afrinic Policy Working Group. From Lee.Howard at stanleyassociates.com Mon Dec 5 15:20:39 2005 From: Lee.Howard at stanleyassociates.com (Howard, W. Lee) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Guidelines for Temporary Assignments/Allocations Message-ID: <369EB04A0951824ABE7D8BAC67AF9BB4BC5306@CL-S-EX-1.stanleyassociates.com> I would like to point out a possible area for abuse on the first proposed policy. Many ISPs block unallocated address space so that spammers and other bad guys don't announce space they don't own. A pre-determined block of address space that is only occasionally in use would be an excellent target for them. Also, the title of the policy includes the words "critical establishments" and "like IXPs," but the policy looks like it's for temporary assignments only. I think the title should be changed--critical infrastructure is separate from temporary assignments. Lee > -----Original Message----- > From: policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net > [mailto:policy-wg-bounces@afrinic.net] On Behalf Of mouhamet@next.sn > Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 3:54 PM > To: policy-wg@afrinic.net > Subject: [policy-wg] Policy to be discussed in Cairo > > Dear colleagues, > > The following policies have been proposed and will be > discussed in Cairo for a last time before being passed > to the Board: > > o Temporary Assignments & assignments for critical > establishments (like IXPs). > > Policy Affected: None (New) > Date: 16-Apr-2005 > > The proposal defines the policy that AfriNIC will use to > assign IP Addresses for temporary use. (Alain Aina) > > http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/afpol-tmpal200504.htm > > > o Direct/PI Assignments from AfriNIC to end-user organisations. > > Policy Affected: None (New) > Date: 16-Apr-2005 > > The proposal defines the policy for Provider Independent (PI) > IPv4 Assignments to end-user organisations in the AfriNIC > region (Mark Tinka). > > http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/afpol-v4eu200504.htm > > > o Criteria for assignment of AS Numbers. > > Policy Affected: afpol-as200407-000 > Date: 16-Apr-2005 > > The proposal defines minor changes to the criteria for ASN > assignments in the AfriNIC region (Mark Tinka). > > http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/drafts/afpol-chgasn200508.htm > ** Section 4 of the policy document > > o Global policy for IPv6 Allocation from IANA to RIRs. > > Policy Affected: None (New) > Date: 16-Apr-.2005 > > This proposal describes the policy governing the allocation of > IPv6 address space from the IANA to the Regional Internet > Registries > (RIRs). This document does not stipulate performance requirements > in the provision of services by IANA to an RIR in accordance with > this policy. Such requirements will be specified by appropriate > agreements between ICANN and the NRO (Alan Barrett). > > http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/drafts/afpol-glbipv6200508.htm > > > Thanks > > Mouhamet Diop > Afrinic Policy Working Group. > > _______________________________________________ > policy-wg mailing list > policy-wg@afrinic.net > http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg > From gih at apnic.net Fri Dec 9 06:59:48 2005 From: gih at apnic.net (Geoff Huston) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] 4-Byte AS Number Policy Proposal Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.2.20051209155054.02b9d788@localhost> 1. Author: Geoff Huston 2. Organization: APNIC 3. Policy Affected: afpol-as200407-000 - ASN Allocation Policy 4. Date: 9 December 2005 Proposal: 4-Byte AS Number Policy Proposal Author: Geoff Huston gih@apnic.net APNIC Proposal Version: 1.0 Proposal Type: New Policy Term: Temporary (1 January 2007 ? 1 January 2010) Policy Statement: This policy proposal nominates 3 dates for changes to the current AS Number allocation policy for the registry: On 1 January 2007 the registry will process applications that specifically request 4-byte only AS Numbers and allocate such AS Numbers as requested by the applicant. In the absence of any specific request for a 4-byte only AS Number, a 2-byte only AS Number will be allocated by the registry. On 1 January 2009 the registry will process applications that specifically request 2-byte only AS Numbers and allocate such AS Numbers as requested by the applicant. In the absence of any specific request for a 2-byte only AS Number, a 4-byte only AS Number will be allocated by the registry. On 1 January 2010 the registry will cease to make any distinction between 2-byte only AS Numbers and 4-byte only AS Numbers, and will operate AS number allocations from an undifferentiated 4-byte AS Number allocation pool. Nomenclature It is proposed to identify 4-byte AS Numbers using a syntax of :. Accordingly, a 4-byte AS number of value 65546 (decimal) would be identified as ?1:10?. Terminology ?2-byte only AS Numbers? refers to AS numbers in the range 0 ? 65535 ?4-byte only AS Numbers? refers to AS Numbers in the range 1:0 ? 65535:65535 (decimal range 65,536 - 4,294,967,295) ?4-byte AS Numbers? refers to AS Numbers in the range 0:0 ? 65535:65535 (decimal range 0 ? 4,294,967,295) Rationale: Recent studies of AS number consumption rates indicate that the existing 2-byte pool of unallocated AS Numbers will be exhausted sometime in the period between 2010 and 2016, absent of any concerted efforts of recovery of already-allocated AS Numbers [1] [2]. Standardization work in the IETF has produced a document that is currently being submitted as a Proposed Standard that will expand the AS Number space to a 4-byte field [3]. It is noted that some advance period may be required by network operators to undertake the appropriate procedures relating to support of 4-byte AS numbers, and while no flag day is required in the transition to the longer AS Number field, it is recognised that a prudent course of action is to allow for allocation of these extended AS numbers well in advance of an anticipated 2-byte AS Number exhaustion date. This policy proposal details a set of actions and associated dates for RIR AS Number allocation policies to assist in an orderly transition to use of the 4-byte AS Number space. The essential attributes of this policy proposal are to facilitate the ease of transitional arrangements by equipment vendors, network managers and network operations staff, to provide the industry with some predictability in terms of dates and associated actions with respect to registry operational procedures for AS Number allocations. References [1] Daily AS Number Report, http://www.potaroo.net/tools/asns [2] ASNs MIA: A Comparision of RIR Statistics and RIS Reality, http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0510/wilhelm.html [3] BGP Support for Four-octet AS Number Space, draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-12.txt Timetable for implementation: Procedures to support this proposal need to be implemented by 1 January 2007 From mouhamet at next.sn Tue Dec 13 22:01:22 2005 From: mouhamet at next.sn (Mouhamet Diop) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Meeting for the tomorrow. 14 December 2005 In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20051007143244.03529588@mail.afrinic.net> Message-ID: <200512132001.jBDK1d2F001715@ns1.afrinic.net> Hello Everybody, Sorry for not being to be physically there. The flight that I booked for from Dakar to Accra and Accra to Cairo to arrive at 5:00 AM tomorrow was postponed. So I cannot get there until 14:00 PM Any flight from here (through Paris or Zurich, or Marocco) to Cairo will arrived not before 14:00PM tomorrow !! So I think I will be easier for me to follow the discussion on line or via conference call, if such facilities are available. I would really appreciate to participate orally in order to give some of my thoughts live with all the Afrinic Community present in Cairo. Have fun. ------------------------------------ Mouhamet Diop CEO mouhamet@next.sn Next SA, 79 Rue Joseph Gomis. 2e Etage. P.O. Box 7474 Medina Dakar Senegal tel: +221 (821) 42 02 fax: +221 (821) 42 03 mobile: +221 (638) 42 88 ------------------------------------ See you at AfriNIC-3 and AfriIPv6 Meeting Cairo, Egypt 11-14 December 2005 www.afrinic.net/meetings/afrinic-3 _______________________________________________ policy-wg mailing list policy-wg@afrinic.net http://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/policy-wg From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Dec 13 22:25:04 2005 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed Nov 8 07:57:10 2006 Subject: [policy-wg] Meeting for the tomorrow. 14 December 2005 In-Reply-To: <200512132001.jBDK1d2F001715@ns1.afrinic.net> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20051007143244.03529588@mail.afrinic.net> <200512132001.jBDK1d2F001715@ns1.afrinic.net> Message-ID: Hi, I'm missing the show as well, as I am working feverishly on a project that wil break the Interconnection charging paradigm we are facing! I'll let you know all about it ASAP!! -- Cheers, McTim $ whois -h whois.afrinic.net mctim