[AFRINIC-rpd] IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment proposal

[sm+afrinic at elandsys.com]

Hi Andrew,
At 14:40 22-01-2013, Andrew Alston wrote:
>I have to say your comments inline having read through them do 
>nothing to actually endear my support for this policy.  They 
>indicate what I think has been highlighted time and again on this 
>list in the last few weeks, the requirements to get IP space from 
>AfriNIC at the moment are complex and difficult and rigorous.  There 
>have been multiple people who have commented that perhaps a 
>loosening of the reigns is necessary and a change in existing policy 
>is necessary to increase the current burn rate.  What this policy 
>does is take everything that is negative about the current policy, 
>duplicate it into a more modern policy and add more negative aspects.

I'll comment below.

>Just because its in current policy does NOT mean that its 
>necessarily sane and is no justification for using it in a new, 
>draconian, complex and dangerous policy that could have extremely 
>dangerous implications

Yes.

The proposal is not about the current policy being sane.  The text in 
the proposal is a starting point.  You have highlighted that the 
requirements to get IPv4 address space is difficult and 
rigorous.  One alternative is to come up a proposal to decrease the 
hurdles.   This means reviewing what's there now (which you have been 
doing) and suggesting text changes.  I am not suggesting keeping the 
negative aspects.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy