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

[AFRINIC-rpd] IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment proposal

sm+afrinic at sm+afrinic at
Thu Jan 24 17:35:03 UTC 2013

Hi Andrew,
At 05:14 24-01-2013, Andrew Alston wrote:
>What is not clear about this one please?
>It's not clear if the current policies (or SM's policy) actually demand that
>an LIR be an ISP.  The definitions seem to define an LIR as an ISP, they do
>not however define an ISP as an LIR.  Meaning that you could potentially be
>an LIR, not be an ISP but be defined as such in AfriNIC's policies.  It's a
>little messy with the current wording to figure this out.

It's difficult to tell whether a LIR has to be an ISP under the 
existing policy.  I am okay with removing Section 2.5 (or any other 
section) from the proposal.

>Tough question.  I would suspect that Google could technically qualify to be
>an end user though its hard to know if they have other reasons for being an


S. Moonesamy  

More information about the RPD mailing list