[AFRINIC-rpd] Academic IPv4 Allocation Policy Second Draft (AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02)

[Andrew Alston]

That is correct Owen,

Andrew


-----Original Message-----
From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen at delong.com] 
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 12:57 AM
To: Andrew Alston
Cc: 'SM'; 'Badru Ntege'; rpd at afrinic.net
Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Academic IPv4 Allocation Policy Second Draft
(AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02)

It is my understanding that any organization can always request less
resources than they are entitled to under policy.

Therefore, a policy that specifies an institution is entitled to 5:1 does
not prevent them from requesting addresses equal to 3:1.

Owen

On Jan 26, 2013, at 02:17 , Andrew Alston <alston.networks at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi SM,
> 
> We have discussed within AfriNIC at various times over the years 
> holding onto our space so that it will be available as we develop.  
> The same applies to Universities.  I would argue that any University 
> with 10 thousand students to remain competitive will upgrade their 
> infrastructure, and that's happening at a drastically accelerated 
> rate, because the internet infrastructure on university campuses is 
> becoming critical to the academic experience (as stated by Guy Halse).
> 
> Furthermore, since it is fast becoming cheaper for a University to 
> upgrade its infrastructure to support such access than to deliver 
> content via more traditional methods, the progression of infrastructure is
a natural thing.
> I point at an example of a small University in South Africa that is 
> predominantly rural, and actually generally runs very close to the red 
> in financial terms.  Because of a need to drive down costs and provide 
> better access, they, even in their financial position, realized it was 
> prudent to do massive upgrades, and went and sourced the money to do 
> so.  The Universities may not upgrade at the same rate, but within the 
> next 3 years, because of the criticality of online resources to 
> teaching and academia, wifi network infrastructure to allow students 
> to access things *will* be common place in my opinion.
> 
> So, in answer to question (a), no, the non-utilization problem will 
> resolve itself shortly, and furthermore, there is no actual practical 
> way to audit this anyway and (b) no, that is something that will 
> happen over the course of time.
> 
> Look, I had a long discussion last night telephonically with Nii about 
> this, and I would love to see a situation where a University could 
> specify a ratio they *needed* up to a maximum of X, so if we said a 
> university can turn around and say we need a ratio of 3:1, whereas 
> another can say we need 5:1, both are <= 5, both are accepted by 
> AfriNIC on face value, I would accept this.  However, AfriNIC would 
> then need to commit to accepting these values at face value argument 
> and back and forth.  Otherwise, we need the fixed ratio in policy to avoid
the same issues we are currently having.
> 
> Currently the policy sets a minimum of 5, higher can be justified.  I 
> would be happy to say any ratio below or equal to 5 is accepted 
> de-facto based on institutional statement, anything above 5 requires 
> further justification that can be investigated.  Would this suffice?
> 
> Andrew
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: SM [mailto:sm at resistor.net]
> Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 11:07 AM
> To: Badru Ntege; Andrew Alston
> Cc: rpd at afrinic.net
> Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Academic IPv4 Allocation Policy Second 
> Draft
> (AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02)
> 
> Hi Badru,
> At 20:18 25-01-2013, Badru Ntege wrote:
>> The statistics are showing the demand for the urban institutions with 
>> the financial resources to build a network that can support this 
>> demand and thus the need to have an idea of the network.  But out in 
>> the real world not all academic institutions have the resources to 
>> build such networks.
>> 
>> which is why it is a good idea to have an understanding of the 
>> network size.  if we go by institutional population we might be 
>> introducing a major flaw.
> 
> I'll try and restate what you said in the first 
> paragraph.  University A and B each have 10,000 persons.   University 
> A has the resources to build a network to service these 10,000 persons.
> University B does not have the resources to build a network to service 
> these
> 10,000 persons.  If I use population count as a measure I would be 
> giving
> 50,000 IP addresses to University A and
> 50,000 IP addresses University B.
> 
> University B is using 5,000 IP addresses only and 45,000 IP addresses 
> are not utilized.  The amount of free IP addresses for the region 
> reaches a level where I cannot provide IP addresses to University C 
> which has a population of 5,000 persons.  Somebody points out that 
> there are 45,000 IP addresses not being utilized at University B.  I 
> cannot do anything about it.
> 
> The questions are:
> 
>  (a) Should I fix the non-utilization problem?
> 
>  (b) Is it possible for me to fix the non-utilization problem?
> 
> 
> Regards,
> -sm
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd