Search RPD Archives
[AFRINIC-rpd] Academic IPv4 Allocation Policy Second Draft (AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02)
alston.networks at gmail.com
Mon Jan 28 10:48:34 UTC 2013
I agree with what Owen says below.
As I said, I would not mind adding some wording that allowed an institution to specify a lower ratio if they truly believed that it was in their interests, but I would not want to erode the fact that until you hit the 5:1 the justification is less onerous. The policy does NOT currently stop you applying for more space though, it just requires additional documentation, where as your wording below Seun would stop them applying for more (and that’s got issues).
From: rpd-bounces at afrinic.net [mailto:rpd-bounces at afrinic.net] On Behalf Of Owen DeLong
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 12:33 PM
To: Seun Ojedeji
Cc: rpd at afrinic.net
Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Academic IPv4 Allocation Policy Second Draft (AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-02)
On Jan 28, 2013, at 02:10 , Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Nii Narku Quaynor <quaynor at ghana.com> wrote:
> No. Not to my knowledge.
Thanks. What prevents a university from receiving a 10:1 via current policies
I also agree as the current policy as i quote below does not indicate any upper boundary limit
3.5) Under the policy, HEI shall be eligible to receive IPv4 resources at a ratio not less than 5 IPv4 addresses per campus user, where campus user is defined in 3.2).
In view of this, i suggest a modification as thus:
3.5) Under the policy, HEI shall be eligible to receive IPv4 resources at a ratio not more than 5 IPv4 addresses per campus user, where campus user is defined in 3.2).
Seun, I think you misunderstand.
The policy does not require them to request at least 5:1. The policy as written means that AfriNIC cannot request additional justification for any request ≤ 5:1.
Your proposed modification would, instead, reverse this such that AfriNIC could require additional justification at any ration and further could flat out deny any
request in excess of 5:1 which I think would have unintended consequences.
The intent was not to have an upper limit if sufficient justification is provided, but to streamline the justification process for any amount up to and including 5:1.
Since some institution may actually prefer to use less than 5 to 1 ratio, not because they don't want but probably because of the infrastructure limitation they have which is largely related to funding
I would recommend that such an institution obtain the addresses and then seek additional funding for their network.
I do not believe that minimizing address requests up front is a winning or desirable strategy at the current rate of evolution of network capabilities in the region.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD