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

[AFRINIC-rpd] Latest version of the policy AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-03

Alan Barrett apb at
Tue Jun 25 09:09:26 UTC 2013

On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, McTim wrote:
>> Any institution is allowed any amount of resources so long as they can
>> justify the use. HI’s struggle to do this and this policy makes it easier
>> for them.
>This is the key that we should focus on IMHO.
>Why do they struggle and what can we do to help them!!??

Thanks, that's a nice lead-in to my comments.

I neither support nor oppose this policy proposal.

Reasons not to oppose:

1. The total number of IPv4 addresses assigned under this proposal would
    be similar to the total number assigned under a requirement for
    detailed network plans, if not immediately, then in the future as
    academic institutions improve their network infrastructure.

2. This policy proposal would reduce the paperwork for both the
    applicant and the AFRINIC staff, while still allowing a reasonable
    total number of IPv4 addresses to be allocated.

Reasons not to support:

3. I think that the same policy should apply to everybody; I don't
    like different rules for different types of organisations.

4. I think that academic institutions should be able to get the IPv4
    address space that they need by following the same application
    process as anybody else, including demonstrating a need for the

5. I think that a detailed network plan, including estimates of number
    of concurrent users of wireless networks, should be sufficient
    to demonstrate a need for the space.  There should be no need for
    a formula involving the number of students.

6. If the AFRINIC staff reject network plans, then it should usually
    be for one of these reasons:
      a) the plan has insufficient detail;
      b) the plan does not support the number of addresses in the
      c) the plan appears to be fraudulent.

    It should not be for these reasons:
      d) AFRINIC staff demand an unrealistic level of detail;
      e) AFRINIC staff do not understand the plan, or do not understand
         the technology used in the network.

    The introduction to proposal AFPUB-2013-GEN-001 suggests that
    (d) and (e) are being used as reasons to reject applications,
    and if this is the case then I think that should be addressed by
    changes in internal AFRINIC procedures, and by staff training,
    not by changes in policy.

--apb (Alan Barrett)

More information about the RPD mailing list