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

[AfriNIC-rpd] Re: Proposal: Reclamation of allocated but unrouted IPv4 addresses.

Jackson Muthili jacksonmuthi at
Thu Feb 10 15:31:12 UTC 2011


On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Hannigan, Martin <marty at> wrote:
> On 2/10/11 2:43 AM, "Jackson Muthili" <jacksonmuthi at> wrote:
>> Andrew,
>>> I have a major problem with this.  Legacy allocations were issued before the
>>> RIR's were ever created, and were not bound by the policies that govern the
>>> current RIR's.  As such, while the RIR's do control such services as the
>>> whois, I believe it would be extremely problematic to attempt to force
>>> impose policies on the holders such space.  This has been the subject of
>>> much discussion recently on the nanog lists as well.
>> If the community decides to extend policy to apply to legacy members,
>> this would not be a problem anymore. They can be made to sign an
>> afrinic contract by a certain date, beyond which - their addresses can
>> be revoked. Unfortunately, this sounds stern but with the situation we
>> are soon facing, IPv4 will be on great great demand especially when
>> afrinic pool is depleted.
> Jack,
> You think that Level(3), GE, Ford and Halliburton et. Al. are going to sign
> an Afrinic membership agreement and put their resources under agreement or
> allow their resources to be revoked by Afrinic, who had nothing to do with
> their initial assignment? Can you give me some basis for this belief?

When community has decided by way of policy, what will Level3, GE,
Ford et al do? sue? who?


> Best,
> -M<

More information about the RPD mailing list