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

[AFRINIC-rpd] PDP discussions

Andrew Alston alston.networks at
Wed Jun 26 08:30:12 UTC 2013

1) -The financial aspect of this policy cannot be cancel because these
addresses are the source of revenue for afrinic's activities.

We aren't advocating cancelling any financial aspect, if you read the
numbers I have specified I have demonstrated that this should not have a
negative effect on the financial aspects of AfriNIC, and any financial
impact it would have would be the purview of the board to address through
adjustments to the fee structure which are outside of the remit of the PDP.
In contrast, should this policy be actively used, it would result in an
INCREASE in application fee revenue rather than a decrease, which should
also help to offset the loss made by AfriNIC last year.  Please if we are
going to talk about the financial impact, can you respond directly to my
email that addressed the financial issues in detail, and pose questions
specifically directed at that response.  Part of the consensus building
process is to look closely at responses and then if those responses are not
satisfactory to respond to the response with either more questions or a
rebuttal of the specific issues raised in the response.

2) -Why not putting in place this policy for IPv6 where we can have 1:10
ratio for every single student including those who are at not at the
universites. In my opinion, this will be the best way to promote v6
transition at national and continental level. And it's free now.

Errr, The policy requires a V6 plan to qualify under it, and since that
means you get IPv6 when you apply for this policy, you will end up with a
minimum of a /48 by current AfriNIC minimum allocation policies.  So,
technically this policy forces every institution who applies under this
policy to take 2^80 IPv6 addresses (1208925819614629174706176), which means
that even if they had a student population of 100 thousand, and would have
sufficient IPv6 addresses to allocate 12089258196 BILLION addresses per
student so well, this is kind of taken care of in current policy

3) I would like to understand what is the true or hidden reason of this
policy. You can send it privately :).

The true reason behind this policy has been stated.  Make it easier for
Academia to access space, address the imbalance that is created by the fact
that institutions with money and masses of infrastructure can far more
easily get access to space, and to ensure that space remains on the
continent rather than being taken off the continent.  If you have reason to
believe there are any other motives behind this policy proposal, or any
hidden reasons, I would challenge you to state what your beliefs are on this
list in public, and back up such statements with evidence.  Once I have
heard your beliefs on the matter I will happily debate them in front of the
community, so please, if this is your belief, state it here, and state it
openly and lets discuss.

Best Regards,

2013/6/25 Andrew Alston <alston.networks at>
> Actually Owen, 
> I disagree, the policy in no way asks for discount, the policy says that a
> discount that is current applies.  If no such discount is current as per the
> board decisions on such, it will not apply.  This was made clear in the
> meeting when you were not present.
> At the moment at board discretion, a 50% discount applies to academia, the
> policy merely maintains that discount.  If that discount were to be revoked,
> there would be no discount for that clause in the policy to apply to and no
> discount would be applied.
> We openly said in the presentation about this policy at the meeting that we
> were not interested in dealing with the financial aspects since those are not
> the remit of the PDP, but rather the remit of the board. And we stated this
> extremely clearly.
> Andrew
> From:  Owen DeLong <owen at>
> Date:  Tuesday 25 June 2013 10:18 PM
> To:  Andrew Alston <alston.networks at>
> Cc:  Maye Diop <mayediop at>, rpd <rpd at>, Alan Barrett
> <apb at>
> Subject:  Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] PDP discussions
> On Jun 24, 2013, at 03:08 , Andrew Alston <alston.networks at> wrote:
>> Hi Maye,
>> I do not understand how you can claim this is depriving AfriNIC of its
>> revenues.  Let us look at some hard facts.
>> Firstly, annual fees and application fees will still apply to any
>> applications made under this policy, the policy does not change the fee
>> structure in any way shape or form.  Secondly, irrespective of if the space
>> is used under this policy or by other organisations, the money is still
>> coming in.  The current revenues generated by already existent applications
>> will also keep flowing.
> You cannot have it both ways, Andrew. You can not argue on one hand that
> Academic institutions should receive a discount and special treatment that
> makes them end-users when they are conducting themselves in a manner that
> looks very much like an LIR and on the other had claim that doing so has no
> impact to revenues.
> I'm neutral as to the policy and I do not believe it will do significant
> fiscal damage to AfriNIC, but your argument above is an insult to the
> intellect of the reader.
> Owen

Mme Ndéye Maimouna DIOP
Spécialiste ICT4D

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

More information about the RPD mailing list