[AFRINIC-rpd] AFRINIC Response to Government Calls for an Arab RIR

[Stephen Wilcox]

On 27 February 2013 17:25, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:

> Stephen,
>
> On Feb 27, 2013, at 9:15 AM, Stephen Wilcox <steve.wilcox at ixreach.com>
> wrote:
> > Actually, I rather wish the rest of my post had been commented on - this
> to me is clearly a continuation of the political lobbying from the same
> groups that caused the ITU WCIT meeting to split and it more about
> regulatory control and monetization of the Internet.
>
> I don't think it matters how/why the proposal was generated. There have
> been calls in the past to create new RIRs and there will undoubtedly be
> calls in the future.  What I believe actually matters is whether there is
> an "area of continental size" (which MENA would likely qualify) that meets
> the principles laid out in ICP-2.  In particular, can the requirement of
> "Clear consensus must be demonstrated within the community that a very
> substantial majority of the ISPs in the region are prepared to support the
> new RIR." be met?
>

I disagree about the how/why. I think it does matter.

There's 5 RIRs, Owen recounted a nice history of them. These are not
something that are routinely created or highly prescriptive in a process.
There needs to be good reasons to the existing RIR communities as to why
they need to break out a new RIR from their existing base. In the past that
has been shown and hence we have seen RIRs covering all the worlds large,
populated continents.

If the reason for wanting to carve a new RIR out of AfriNIC and RIPE is a
political purpose, or some reason that is not generally part of what we
think of as being the function of an RIR then we should see it as different
and bringing a 6th RIR will bring a significant platform for politics to
the global stage that does not now exist. As members of AfriNIC and RIPE,
the existing communities should decide if they want to break themselves up
this way and introduce this new aspect.

To this point, even if you define "MENA" as a continental region, I think
there are issues with the other points of ICP-2 particularly:

3) Bottom-up self-governance structure for setting local policies

4) Neutrality and impartiality in relation to all interested parties, and
particularly the LIRs

FYI:
http://www.icann.org/en/news/in-focus/global-addressing/new-rirs-criteria


I am hence suggesting it doesnt sound like a good idea, before it gathers
too much momentum..

Steve
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20130227/f4bae5df/attachment.html>