Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[IOZ] [AfriNIC-rpd] Re: Fwd: AfriNIC position on the future of IP number resources

McTim dogwallah at
Tue Aug 14 09:16:52 UTC 2007

HI again,

On 8/13/07, Alan Levin <alan at> wrote:

<appleberries snipped> AA explained it well.

> >
> > Reserves are a good thing.  IIRC, ISOC still does some funding of
> > AfriNIC.
> > I don't think we can count on that forever.
> Various activities are sponsored for various reasons. That's not
> AfriNIC sponsorship.

I beg to differ. Once the funding stops, the NIC wil need to take up the slack.

> Good point though, as per my proposal, I believe that AfriNIC are in
> an ideal position to obtain sponsorship for this too...

Perhaps... if so I will gladly take a /48 of IPv6 Pi space for free.

I suspect many, many others would as well.  Again...slippery slope.

> I guess it could come down to the debate, what results in more/better
> skills: AfNOG/AfriNIC training or free PI space to community
> networks?   I'd prefer not to go down that path as I don't think it's
> an either or. Both are good and I'm sure that there are another half
> a dozen good ideas worth considering.
> Adiel, can you enumerate the direct cost of processing an IPv6 PI
> allocation?

Dewd, it's an assignment!  In any case about an hour or less of hosty time,

However, you have to think about the total cost of running the RIR,
who pays for this overhead? Obvioulsy LIRs do (who are mostly ISPs).
These are the ppl who will be competing against free/low-cost
community networks (in many cases).

If I decided to build a community network (say free meshed wifi for
everyone) in Kampala, and went to all the ISPs asking them to
subsidise my free IPv6 space, they'd laugh me out of town.

> AFAIK, the board has accumulated over a years worth of operating
> expenses in surplus over the past couple of years. I congratulate
> those responsible (albeit that I personally cannot see why they would
> really need it, kind of like the few small gold coins my dad has
> hidden away in some drawer). In any case I am proposing a well
> recognized concept of price elasticity (which I don't feel exists at
> the large ISP level).
> Please can you explain why you feel this should wait longer?

See above re: funding of RIR

> >>> On 8/8/07, Alan Levin <alan at> wrote:
> >>>> I believe that community networks often use many gateways and
> >>>> upstreams. It wouldn't make sense to use an assignment from one.
> >>>
> >>> Not from one, but from many. Lots of folk multihome using multiple
> >>> ranges.
> >>
> >> Interesting. So how does this work practically? With NATs?
> >
> > In the spirit of "a picture is worth a thousand words", I have
> We've done this. It worked (partially) for a while.. until it
> broke.... and broke again .... and then the LIR3 changed their policy
> and said they won't announce LIR2's space, blah blah... Also, it
> doesn't work properly because of the global routes at higher levels.
> I wouldn't do this again.... Even NATs are more reliable :(

Then NAT it's your choice.  Many  networks do this, it works for them.

> If it's the 'undefined' part, then I think we can get over that. If
> you don't think any network should get a sponsored assignment, I'd
> like to understand why?
> >>> Third, can you define a community network?  I give free WiFi to my
> >>> neighbors, does this mean I get an ASN and a PI block?
> >>
> >> If you meet the IPv6 and ASN criteria then yes (i.e. you will need to
> >> have a sufficient number of neighbours like the guys in Scarborough
> >> who connected up the whole village and now have more than 100
> >> neighbours on their network.)
> >
> > ok, then what is sufficient number?
> As per PI policy criteria... I think I said that?

There are no numbers mentioned in

> > If you want to see a micro (smaller than Very Small) then propose
> > that.
> I think that we (Africans) need to do more stuff. We have the lowest
> number of assignments and usage in the world. I think what the guys
> from AfriNIC are doing is good. I'm just trying to help us all do
> better. AfriNIC need not follow the rest of the world. We need to be
> innovative and responsive. I'm supportive and grateful for all the
> positive comments that go on the list and I think constructive debate
> is good.

Yes, let's hear from some others, we have both made our positions clear I think.


$ whois -h mctim

More information about the RPD mailing list