Search RPD Archives
[AFRINIC-rpd] PDP discussions
benjamin.eshun at gmail.com
Mon Jun 24 13:54:29 UTC 2013
I was one of the participants in the room that supported this proposal when
it was tabled. I did so b'cos at the time I taught would be a vehicle to
ensure that my institution gets the needed IP resources to move away from
the /28 we currently have with our upstream provider. If you would allow
me I would like to suggest a possible middle ground.
On 24 June 2013 12:19, Badru Ntege <ntegeb at one2net.co.ug> wrote:
> What are we trying to fix ?
We are trying to fix the problem where a university heavily "NATed" using a
/29 or /28 from their upstream provider needs to acquire IP resources to be
"unNATed", but b'cos of poor documentation or procurement processes it has
an "administrative nightmare" getting the needed documentation. We are
aware that in some African Universities (not mime of course) all sorts of
equipment can show up on the door-steps of the ICT Director from people
higher up the food-chain and too many questions about prices and invoices
from the ICT Director, can have serious repercussions. But the number of
students and size of campues etc.. can easily be verified.
At the very least lets have the proposal fix this problem.
Once the university uses this policy or the current one to move from an
upstream provider IP to own IP's from AfriNIC it should NOT qualify for
additional resources using this policy. It should use the current process
for justification. Because quite frankly (let the expects correct me if am
wrong) , any university that has been able to use the current process to
acquire /16 can easily justify using the same process the addition of
another /19 or /20 to the network. For the first criteria of universities
mentioned up, this is a quick fix to leapfrog or get them to catchup, not
for AfriNIC to fix the internal issues.
what is the criteria for success ?
If we adopt this possible middle ground, then its easy to measure how many
universities were using and moved from provider dependent IP space pre and
post this policy. This could be driven by the NREN's and RREN's so that we
get more traction, more visibility and demonstration that the Af* community
is really working together.
what solution will work for all parties ?
I would like to propose the above the let the expects decide.
> And can we do all the above without breaking anything.
This might break the section for additional resources requests. But really
can't have a middle ground without breaking something. And maybe, just
maybe it really doesn't need fixing.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD