Search RPD Archives
[AfriNIC-rpd] IPv4 Soft Landing Policy
sm at resistor.net
Fri May 28 06:52:48 UTC 2010
At 12:58 27-05-10, McTim wrote:
>Yes, but then each of the 1000 plus LIRs wouldn't be able to get a /18
>out of the last /8. /19 might work better, as then there would be a
>bit of "locked-up" space available to play with once we figure out how
>the community wants to allocate the very last dregs (besides the /12
The questions surrounding this proposal might shed some light on why
policies are developed in such a manner. Graham provided a view of
the numbers. This discussion should have happened a long time
ago. I would not call it "locked-up" space unless any attempt to
update the policy goes through the same path as this proposal.
>Who knows, maybe their will be folks so desperate in the "market" at
>that point that the NIC could flog off the last few bits for billions
>of USD, I think the community would be hard pressed to say no that
>that kind of cash ;-)
The fishing industry could be tasked to distribute the proceeds to
nationals on other continents. :-)
>My sense is that the intent of the policy is to lengthen the lifetime
>of v4. It also aims to protect "African" IP space for Africans, which
>is a laudable goal.
>As I have said before, I wish that these two goals were not co-mingled
>in one policy proposal.
The two goals are intertwined. There should have been a debate about
what you said.
The second goal raises larger questions. The other RIR communities
have been more than fair to this region. I hope that this community
will take into account what is in the interest of the Internet
Community, should that question arise, instead of being guided solely
More information about the RPD