Search RPD Archives
[AfriNIC-rpd] IPv4 Soft Landing Policy
sm at resistor.net
Tue May 18 08:03:21 UTC 2010
At 04:00 17-05-10, Douglas Onyango wrote:
>We haven't agreed in principle to include resources that will be
>available to AfriNIC at the time but outside the /8 - i think it is
>important for us to agree on this then this bit and the Incentives,
>summary et al below can be changed among other things:-
The discussions about final /8 block of IPv4 addresses proposals has
been going for over two years. This proposal has been discussed at
the two last meetings.
I'll quote part of Scott's message:
"There are good arguments on both sides, and the question of where to
strike the balance depends a lot on the characteristics of the
Internet market in Africa, which I don't understand all that well,
being from outside the region."
What will happen if AfriNIC is the last RIR to reach the final
/8? There is more to this than "give network operators more time to
make the transition". This proposal reduces the maximum allocation
size and the number of allocations during the Exhaustion
phase. There is a loophole to get around that.
I don't know whether
relevant to this discussion.
>Also very important is for us to address both PA/PI assignment -
>What is you take on addressing Assignment and allocation in the same policy?
Some of the other RIRs would probably reach the final /8 by the time
that discussion concludes.
>I personally don't mind doing it, but like McTim (i believe) pointed
>out a while ago...the proposal seems to do too much.
If the proposal tries to do too much, there will be more opposition to it.
It's difficult to say who will attempt to kill this proposal or why
they might wish to see it killed. :-)
More information about the RPD