[AFRINIC-rpd] policy amendment proposal

[McTim]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 6:28 PM, SM <sm at resistor.net> wrote:
> Hi McTim,
>
> At 13:18 26-11-2012, McTim wrote:
>>
>> Am agnostic on the newgTLDs.  On the one hand you are right, it will
>> "move the needle" in terms of v4 depletion, On the other hand, it will
>> increase the number of AfrINIC LIRs and only use a limited number of
>> /24's, since the new gTLDs are ~1000, and not all of them will take
>> advantage of this policy.  In other words, I doubt this will use more
>> than one (or maybe 2 /16's).
>
>
> It's trivial to set up an organization in the AfriNIC service region and
> provide DNS service for a TLD.  The /24 costs US$ 100.

so this is "end-user" space, not PA?   I would rather they become full
LIRs to get it, but am willing to listen to the authors rationale.

 The non-ccTLDs have
> paid ICANN over US$ 150,000 per string.  They will be selling domain names.
> The shortfall in revenue compared to LIR fees might be over US$ 1,250,0000.
> Nobody has explained how all this will be beneficial to the African region.

I think this math is a red-herring.  The issue is do we allow TLDs to
get space under this policy.  If so, then we can't differentiate
between ccTLDS and gTLDs.

That would be bad policy IMHO.



> Any "dot pick your string" seems to qualify as critical infrastructure.
> Could someone please explain what's critical about such strings?

I don't think there is anything critical about them.  the proposal
calls them "core".  I'm not even sure they are that!

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel