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

[AfriNIC-rpd] Updated Version of the "IPv4 Soft Landing Policy" now Available Online

Owen DeLong owen at
Mon Feb 21 19:51:18 UTC 2011

On Feb 21, 2011, at 6:00 AM, James Blessing wrote:

> On 21/02/2011 09:53, Mukom Akong T wrote:
>> [3] The Proposal
>> This policy (IPv4 Soft Landing), applies to the management of address
>> space that will be available to AfriNIC after the current IPv4 pool is
>> depleted. The purpose of this document is to ensure that address space
>> used in a manner that is acceptable to the AfriNIC community especially
>> during this time of scarcity.
> Wording here seems to be in the wrong tense (or incorrect)
>> AfriNIC will publicly announce that the Exhaustion Phase has begun at
>> this point.
> Add "For the avoidance of doubt all applications that are currently in the process at this point will be evaluated as per the new policy."
>> 3.5 Exhaustion Phase:
>> During the Exhaustion Phase, the following allocation and assignment
>> policy will be used. This policy applies to both LIRs and End Users, and
>> applies at all times after the transition to the Exhaustion Phase.
> Why does this apply to EU and LIR, surely this policy is for LIRs only
It most certainly needs to apply to EU as well unless the change you
are suggesting below is made.

>> The exhaustion phase will be divided into two parts:-
>> a) Exhaustion Phase 1
>> b) Exhaustion Phase 2
>> 3.5.1 Exhaustion Phase 1
>> During this phase, allocation/assignment of address space will continue
>> as in the Current phase (/24 for a EU and /22 for a LIR) but the maximum
>> will change from /10 to /13.
>> Allocations and assignments will be made from the /8 pool until we reach
>> a /11. At this point the Exhaustion Phase 2 phase will kick in.
> Again add "For the avoidance of doubt all applications that are currently in the process at this point will be evaluated as per the new policy."
>> Exhaustion Phase 2
>> During this phase a minimum allocation/assignment size will be /27. And
>> a maximum of /22 per allocation/assignment.
> I think that this is a bad idea as it will increase the memory tables of routers disproportionately. Could this not remain at /24?
I think this is inevitable after runout. IPv4 routing tables are going to grow
substantially as a result of the address trading policies in other regions
and this will not be a significant portion of the routing tale growth.

>> 3.6) If any LIR or End User requesting IPv4 address space during the
>> Exhaustion Phase does not already have IPv6 address space, then AfriNIC
>> shall allocate or assign an IPv6 address block in compliance with the
>> IPv6 allocation or assignment policies in effect at the time.
> Why? Surely the LIR should have applied and completed the process of obtaining a IPv6 allocation/assignment before applying... (this should be a Phase 1 requirement)
>> 3.7) The current allocation and assignment period of 12 months shall be
>> changed to 8 months. This will help to ensure that LIRs request only for
>> resources they need in the short to medium term, and promote fairness in
>> the equitable distribution of the last IPv4 address pool.
> Is this meant to in Phase 1 or Phase 2 - the numbering of the document is not clear.
I think it should apply throughout both phase 1 and phase 2.

>> 3.8 Allocation Criteria
>> In order to receive IPv4 allocations or assignments during the
>> Exhaustion Phase, the LIR or End User must have used at least 90% of all
>> previous allocations or assignments (including those made during both
>> the Current Phase and the Exhaustion Phase). In the case of new LIRs or
>> End Users with no previous allocations or assignments, this requirement
>> does not apply to their first allocation or assignment request.
> Is this for clarification, this should be 90% of the aggregate space assigned or allocated rather than 90% in each separate assignment/allocation
I would read that as 90% of the aggregate overall, not individually 90% of
each. I don't think clarification is needed. I think it would be hard to construe
the existing wording to mean 90% of each separate allocation.

>> AfriNIC resources are for the AfriNIC geographical region. For each
>> allocation or assignment made during the Exhaustion Phase, no more than
>> 10% of these resources may be used outside of the AfriNIC region, and
>> any use outside the AfriNIC region shall be solely in support of
>> connectivity back to the AfriNIC region.
> How is this measured? What counts as 'outside'?
AfriNIC has a clearly defined geographical service region. If an address is
assigned to a device physically outside of that defined region, then, the
address is being used outside of the region. This does not seem like
rocket science to me.

Determining this may be a bit more complex, but, I do not believe that
we should focus on the difficulty of implementing the policy, so much
as we should clearly state the desire and intent of the community.
Having done so, in reality, most of our policies depend entirely on
voluntary compliance anyway, so, this one will not be significantly

>> 3.9 IPv4 Address Space Reserve
>> A /12 IPv4 address block will be in reserve out of the Last /8. This /12
>> IPv4 address block shall be preserved by AfriNIC for some future uses,
>> as yet unforeseen. The Internet is innovative and we cannot predict with
>> certainty what might happen. Therefore, it is prudent to keep this block
>> in reserve, just in case some future requirement creates a demand for
>> IPv4 addresses.
> How does this impact with the /11 in 3.5?
> Would a better approach not to be take a /12 from existing space, set it aside as 'future use' and then change the /11 in 3.5 to a /12?
I think both approaches have the exact same effect and it is much easier to
express in policy in the current manner.

>> 3.9.2
>> When AfriNIC, can no longer meet any more requests for address space
>> from the last /8 pool because the pool is either empty or has no more
>> contiguous blocks, the Board will based on the demand and other factors
>> at the time exercise their prerogative to replenish the exhaustion pool
>> with whatever address space that will be available to AfriNIC at the
>> time in a manner that is in the best interest of the community.
> I suggest this is striken from this policy and added to another.
I think it's fine here, but, thinking more about it, I would suggest rather
than "prerogative to replenish" I would suggest "discretion and may 
replenish". The current wording forces the board to replenish, even
if it may bankrupt the organization. I do not believe that is the intent
of the community.


More information about the RPD mailing list