[AfriNIC-rpd] IPV4 Depletion issues and implications

[Alan Levin]

Hi Mouhamet, Badru, others

OK, I think we're starting to talk about differing pools. I suggest  
that we clearly label the IANA pool, which as David has confirmed  
already has agreed upon policies associated. I am writing here about  
the RIR pools and AfriNIC in particular.

On what basis do you determine that AfriNIC (and LACNIC) will gain  
more from a shared policy?

I ask this question because it sounds like you think the rate of  
return is greater in the other regions, and I am not convinced is the  
case. The example that McTim raises of the TENET allocations should  
give us a high rate of return over the past few years. Which in turn  
should mean that we want to keep these (legacy and swamp space)  
addresses  for reallocation in Africa. So, what are the rates of  
return (by rate I mean: [address space returned over a period of 4  
years] / [total address space] measured per RIR)?  Only with this data  
can you substantiate your point.

Sincerely,

Alan




On 26 Mar 2008, at 6:19 PM, Mouhamet Diop wrote:
> I think we should reconsider the question of the Central Pool to  
> gather
> returned IP address space.
>
> The problem of return IP address space is not an African one (our  
> users are
> not ceoncerned), it is for sure an US problem and a solution for new  
> RIR
> like Afrinic and lacnic.
>
> So if the answer is "we should not interfere into that local policy
> discussion" , it won't be resolved at all...
>
> Central Pool is a good concept but reallocation policy for the  
> returned Pool
> of Address I sa more important topic to discuss and registry like  
> AFRINIC
> and LACNIC will gained more to have that policy discussed a shared  
> policy
> rather than a policy for each RIR.
>
> So if we want the solution to the IPv4 depletion, the question of the
> Central Pool of returned IP address should be considered as central  
> and not
> local.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Mouhamet Diop
>
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : rpd-bounces at afrinic.net [mailto:rpd-bounces at afrinic.net] De la  
> part de
> Badru Ntege
> Envoyé : mercredi 26 mars 2008 15:54
> À : 'AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion List'
> Objet : RE: [AfriNIC-rpd] IPV4 Depletion issues and implications
>
> Alan
>
> Thanks for the excelent comments, it would be nice if we can hear  
> from some
> more people.  By the way the questions are from another fora and i was
> curious to gather some ideas a thoughts from the Afrinic community.   
> You are
> right about the cross polination of policy makers but I wonder  
> whether in a
> region like ours where we still have very low participation we might  
> end up
> adopting policys from other regions colonial style as a result of  
> very low
> active/region specific participation.
>
> badru
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rpd-bounces at afrinic.net [mailto:rpd-bounces at afrinic.net] On  
> Behalf Of
> Alan Levin
> Sent: 26 March 2008 15:14
> To: AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [AfriNIC-rpd] IPV4 Depletion issues and implications
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks Badru for posing these questions.  I offer some answers that
> are my personal opinion only, meant as a straw man. I am no expert and
> participate for discussion purposes and learning.
>
> On 26 Mar 2008, at 9:36 AM, Badru Ntege wrote:
>> 1. Should the RIRs jointly undertake policies or practices to
>> regarding the
>> depletion of the free pools of the IANA or RIRs?
>
> I think that the answer has to be yes. Is it possible for it to be no?
>
> I don't think that they necessarily need to be uniform policies but
> there must be - and already are - such policies, I believe.
>
>> a. Should a central pool be created to gather returned IP address
>> space?
>
> No, I think this should be handled by each RIR.
>
>> How should this pool be administered and managed? Should this be
>> established by an inter-RIR policy?
>
> No, at this stage I think we consider some cases.
>
>>       b. Is there a deleterious effect caused by the adoption of
>> differing
>> transfer policies in some regions that are more liberal than those
>> that
>> currently exist in the regions?
>
> This needs to be phrased in plain english but I attempt a response.
>
> I think that there will be a "deleterious effect" if some RIRs are
> dictated to by other RIRs. This will basically make things very
> difficult as members lose control of their own policy making roles and
> responsibilities.  So it will be far better to allow each RIR their
> own policy, although in my experience there is a sufficient cross
> pollination of policy makers to ensure that they are all aligned.
>
>>       c. Should an inter-RIR policy be developed for the purpose of
>> conducting transfers of Internet Number Resources between regions?
>
> I think not until we know more.
> How is this different from Qu1?
>
> regards
>
> Alan
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Alan Levin
> Tel: +27 21 409-7997
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>

-- 
Alan Levin
Tel: +27 21 409-7997