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

[AfriNIC-rpd] Report on policy discussions at the AfriNIC-13 meeting

sm+afrinic at sm+afrinic at
Sun Nov 28 13:25:52 UTC 2010

This is a report on policy discussions at the AfriNIC-13 meeting, held
in Johannesburg, South Africa on 24 and 25 November 2010.  More detailed
minutes will be posted within the next three weeks.

Four policy proposals were discussed.

Abuse Contact Information in the AfriNIC service region

    There was consensus on progressing this proposal to
    Last Call.  No changes were suggested during the meeting.

Addition of Real Contact Email into ASN Whois Bulk Data

    This proposal did not gain consensus.  Some objections were that it
    was too vague, that it seemed too specific to one particular user
    of the data, and that the intent of the proposal could be satisfied
    under the abuse contact information proposal (AFPUB-2010-GEN-006).

IPv4 Soft Landing Proposal

    There was consensus on progressing this proposal to Last Call.

    The following changes or clarifications were suggested, and all
    gained consensus:

      * Policies under the exhaustion phase apply equally to all IPv4
        address space available to AfriNIC during this phase, regardless
        of whether or not the address space is part of the "Final /8".

      * Change the names of the two sub-phases within the Exhaustion
        Phase (sections 6.1a and 6.1b) to "Exhaustion Phase 1" and
        "Exhaustion Phase 2".

      * Clarify that the maximum allocation size of /22 (section 6.1b)
        applies independently to each allocation.  There is no limit to
        the number of times the same organisation may receive allocations
        under this policy.

    There was a concern that the minimum allocation size of /27 (section
    6.1b) would lead to problems with routability.  Other people
    expressed the views that this proposal would probably remain in
    effect for several years, that technology changes in future might
    allow routability for small blocks, and that some allocations might
    be used in ways that do not require global routability.  Consensus
    was that this issue did not require any change to the proposal.

Global Policy for IPv4 Allocations by the IANA Post Exhaustion

    AFPUB-2010-v4-003 was presented at the Public Policy Meeting by
    Martin Hannigan with some changes.  The outgoing PDP-MG (working
    under the previous version of the Policy Development Process,
    AFPUB-2008-GEN-001) had asked the authors of the proposal not to
    post a new version of the proposal to the Resource Policy Discussion
    mailing list as it was past the deadline of 18th November for
    submitting changes.  The PDP-MG had advised the author to introduce
    the changes during the Public Policy Meeting.

    It was pointed out during the Public Policy Meeting that the
    changes should have been circulated for review.  During a break in
    the discussion, Martin Hannigan posted an updated version of the
    proposal.  The updated version was labelled AFPUB-2010-v4-006.

    It was noted that there is some urgency to this proposal, because the
    IANA currently has no way of allocating IPv4 address space to RIRs
    units smaller than a /8, the IANA pool of IPv4 space is likely to be
    entirely depleted before the AfriNIC-14 meeting, and there is the
    possibility that some legacy address space in units smaller than /8
    might be returned to the IANA soon.

    The Working Group Chairs determined that there was rough consensus
    in favour of the AFPUB-2010-v4-006 proposal, but there were concerns
    about the fact that the version of the proposal presented at the
    meeting was not the same as the version posted to the RPD mailing
    list or posted on the AfriNIC web site before the meeting.

    As a result of confusion during the transition from the previous
    Policy Development Process (AFPUB-2008-GEN-001) to the new Policy
    Development Process (AFPUB-2010-GEN-005), the following requirement
    of Section 5.2 of AFPUB-2010-GEN-005 was violated:

      "No change can be made to a draft policy within one week of the
       meeting.  This is so that a stable version of the draft policy can
       be considered at the meeting."

    There was a view to allow the proposal to progress to Last Call
    despite concerns about the process.  There were comments about
    following the process even though it would cause problems for a
    proposal that otherwise has consensus, and some people expressed the
    hope that a method could be found to allow the proposal to progress
    rapidly without violating the process.

    The PDWG Chairs determined that, even though there was rough
    consensus in favour of the proposal, compliance with the policy
    development process requires that the proposal should not progress
    to Last Call now.  Accordingly, discussion should continue on the
    Resource Policy Discussion mailing list, and the proposal may be
    considered again at the AfriNIC-14 meeting.  If passing this proposal
    becomes urgent, it is possible that the emergency process (section 7
    of AFPUB-2010-GEN-005) may be invoked before the AfriNIC-14 meeting.

Alan Barrett and S. Moonesamy
Interim co-chairs, AfriNIC Policy Development Working Group
26 November 2010

More information about the RPD mailing list