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

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

Andrew Alston alston.networks at
Mon Feb 4 14:31:28 UTC 2013

Ok Maina,


So, let me summarize the last few emails.


You acknowledge that there are institutions (Urban ones) that have a need
for greater than 3 (as demonstrated by studies).

You acknowledge that students will have 1 laptop and 1 phone each at minimum
(so a minimum of 2 devices, without any campus infrastructure, making this
useless, therefore needing 3).


Yet, you wish to make the maximum 1:3, penalizing the first category, and
make the minimum 1:2 which will not work by your own acknowledgements in
previous emails about the phone/notebook technology.


I still do not understand the problem with having a maximum of 1:5 is with
no minimum is, particularly considering that as stated by many people on
this list, we need to increase the burn rate and make it easier to access
space for those who need it, and considering the growth factors all over the
continent as demonstrated in previous emails.  Can you please explain
exactly what the problem with having this maximum is when people have the
option to specify lower?  





From: Maina Noah [mailto:mainanoa at] 
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 4:12 PM
To: Andrew Alston
Cc: Jackson Muthili; rpd
Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Academic IPv4 Allocation Policy Second Draft


Hi Andrew,


we stick with 1:2 minimum and 1:3 max for the proposal and that should be




On 4 February 2013 17:05, Andrew Alston <alston.networks at> wrote:

Hi Maina,


Ok, so even if I agree with you at 2 devices per student (I don't but let's
assume I do), 1:2 still does not then cater for staff, it does not cater for
university infrastructure, it does not cater for lab pc's, it does no cater
for wifi infrastructure and a host of other things.


So, even if we say a notebook + phone per student, we STILL need at MINIMUM
1:3 (as per original proposal).


Furthermore, the current proposal does NOT set the minimum at 1:5, it states
that 1:5 is the maximum you can get with minimal justification, after that
you need further justification.  So, if an institution believes they only
need 1:2 or 1:3 they CAN still specify that, they can specify a 1:0.5 if
they really wanted to (it would be crazy, but it could be done).  All the
proposal does is set a maximum figure before lots of documentation is
required.  This means that a university that DOES need 1:5 is still covered,
a university that needs less can apply for less, the option is open to do
that.  What's the problem?





From: Maina Noah [mailto:mainanoa at] 
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 4:00 PM
To: Andrew Alston
Cc: Jackson Muthili; rpd
Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Academic IPv4 Allocation Policy Second Draft




On 4 February 2013 14:49, Andrew Alston <alston.networks at> wrote:

Hi Maina,


Hi Andrew,


Firstly, almost all modern devices that use 3G automatically switch to Wifi
if they are in range and it is accessible.  Try it, take a 3G phone and move
in range of a wifi hotspot the phone is authenticated to.  It switches, move
outta range, it switches back to 3G.



Fine that is a technology feature.


Secondly, You and Jackson are making an argument on affordability of
devices, let me say though, that the argument below is counter-intuitive to
this.  You are saying, let those that have them continue to use their
provider networks and pay the costs associated with 3G.  This means that the
rich students who can afford the data at mobile rates (and it's not cheap),
have a far better experience than those who simply have the devices and
cannot afford the 3G/HSDPA/LTE/Whatever commercial data rates. 


The point is simple and lets not confuse each other and its best we kept
this in the context of students. SO, NOT ALL STUDENTS CAN AFFORD TO HAVE 5
DEVICES, not now and not ever on this continent. 


The issue of affordability is known and i agree with you on that but like i
said my argument stems from the fact that your statistics do not reflect the
reality on the ground across this continent. Even the ones you share about
Nigeria, Kenya, South Africa, Egypt, were all collective internet growth
stats per country not per University in each country.


So, by NOT providing sufficient addressing and accessibility for these
devices, you are effectively advocating for an increase in the digital
divide.  Once again, the poor get screwed while the rich continue to get a
better experience and hence, a better education.  This I have a major
problem with.



No we are not advocating for any digital divide. We are saying that your
ratio of 1:5  does not reflect the reality on the ground which is why i
indicated that from my experience 1:2 is ok and will still do for the poor
students because they will most definitely afford a laptop and a phone.







From: Maina Noah [mailto:mainanoa at] 
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 1:10 PM
To: Andrew Alston
Cc: Jackson Muthili; rpd
Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Academic IPv4 Allocation Policy Second Draft




thanks for this informative research and stats. Do you realize that all
those stats are based on Telecom operators networks and IP infra etc. So the
question is, why the 1:5 ratio if according to all the stats you have
indicated, the same has already been taken care off by the Telecoms who
offer the 3G internet services on those devices thus they are already
pre-assigned with an IP address.




On 4 February 2013 13:25, Andrew Alston <alston.networks at> wrote:

Hi Jackson,


You assume that the ONLY thing you are addressing here are student devices,
what about the University infrastructure itself?  The servers, the staff
pc's, the staff devices, the networking equipment, the wifi ap's themselves,
the list is endless.

Now some stats to say that it is not only South Africa using mobile
connectivity, here are some interesting figures.


An interesting stat, as of 2011 there were 951 MILLION active sim cards in
Africa, a figure *WAY* exceeding urban population, indicating multiple
devices in the mobile space on that base alone.  By end of 2012, that is
predicted to be 1.06 billion, and 1.144 billion by end of 2013 (Stats I
could get were from 2011, so can only give the predictions for 2012/2013 and
not the actual figures).


Furthermore, Africa and Middle east are predicted to have a compound annual
growth rate in mobile connectivity of 129% annually, with a global market
share in mobile connectivity rising from 12% as of 2010 to 20% by end of
2015, with the mobile market in Africa representing over 6 billion dollars
in 2011 and rising to 12 billion dollars in 2014. (Stats courtesy of Informa
Telecoms and Media). 


Now, let's look at some stats from the Mobile Youth Report 2011 (Note, these
are the youth population alone, and not the combined population).  In
Nigeria there are 45 million youth using mobile data, South Africa is at 27
million, Egypt is at close to 30 million, all three nations have
significantly more mobile youth than the UK (currently sitting at around 20
million).   Looking at the Opera Mini State of Mobile web report 2011, we
see a growth of mobile connectivity in Kenya at 82.8%, in Egypt at 190.9%,
in South Africa at 67.7%, in Nigeria at 131.9% in the space of a year.
Between December 2010 and March 2011, there was a 36% growth in Nigeria
alone of smartphone page impressions.  


If we look at mobile traffic growth in terms of traffic (2010 report), the
top country in terms of growth is Sudan, with a 2466% increase in traffic.
This is followed by Morocco (414%), Tunisia (369%), Ghana (287%), Egypt
(174%) and Nigeria (133%).  


Bottom line, your assertion that the use of mobile devices is restricted to
rich South African students seems to be rather. disputed by facts.


Multiple device mobile connectivity is here, it's a reality, we need to wake
up to that fact and cater for it, and this is PARTICULARLY evident in the
youth category that represent the student base of the academic institutions.




From: rpd-bounces at [mailto:rpd-bounces at] On Behalf Of
Maina Noah
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 11:52 AM
To: Jackson Muthili
Cc: rpd
Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Academic IPv4 Allocation Policy Second Draft




On 4 February 2013 11:05, Jackson Muthili <jacksonmuthi at> wrote:


Andrew Aston assumption apply to student from very rich family only in
SA. Even in SA student from 80% of economy not considered rich can not
afford 5 IP device.

This policy does not represent reality of university outside SA.


Jackson, Indeed, which is why the community as a whole needs to be more
realistic with the reality on the ground at various universities hence my
argument which i based sorely on real facts from one Top university here and
i have note visited the other small university's yet of which the situation
could even be more negative. 



I dont support it.

 I would support a 1:2 ratio as opposed to 1:5.   


On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Maina Noah <mainanoa at> wrote:
> On 3 February 2013 16:58, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at> wrote:
>> Hello People
> Hi Seun,
>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el at> wrote:
>>> I don't have issues with my iPhone, iPad, iPad mini, Mac Book Air, iMac,
>>> eeePC, Ubunto server(s) or BlackBerry,
> Right, this students either studies and works and has a good paycheck or
> parents are doing very very well.
>> Here is a sample of one person's gears, just to emphasis that 1:5 is
>> modest ;)
> I have been quietly thinking through the communities 1:5 argument, but one
> little but very important factor is being left out. The fact that NOT
> STUDENT CAN AFFORD TO BUT ALL THOSE TOYS. I went to University of Dar es
> salaam last week to just study the environment and internet usage at the
> campus as my curiosity stemmed from this very 1:5 argument, and guess
> most students can;t even afford to own Laptops. Funny thing is the % of
> students who actually have the Steve Jobs toys are like 10% because they
> even afford them. The Private students only get School Fees from their
> parents and those on Government loans can hardly afford a personal laptop.
> Most of them share laptops haaah. On the issue of phones, there are no
> campus wide wireless networks and thus most students with smartphones are
> using 3G services from the Telecom companies.
> This is a case for one specific HEI in Tanzania and now how about the rest
> of the continents and in other countries. Let us be realistic and stop
> assuming and basing our arguments on some few specific institutions and
> students.
>> Cheers!
> My 2 cents,
> Maina
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list