Search RPD Archives
[AFRINIC-rpd] Commencement of the last call
alston.networks at gmail.com
Wed Jun 26 09:44:11 UTC 2013
I disagree. Current AfriNIC rules and procedures and policies do not in
any way prohibit an ISP from stating that their business is being an ISP,
and then operating an ISP (a small one) on the continent and a much larger
one off the continent on the same space. That is not change of scope or
I will give you an example, say for example a company like Level 3 (Note,
I am not accusing Level 3 of this behaviour, I am merely using them as an
example), came to Africa and started an operation here. They would be
entirely in the rights under current procedures and policies to apply for
space for their operations. There would be nothing stopping them using
that space elsewhere in the world while keeping a small amount of it in
Africa. This only changes in the soft landing policy where 10% of the
space as a maximum may be used off continent.
Their mission and purpose for registration of the space (to use it as an
ISP) has not changed, they would not be violating this clause.
On 2013/06/26 11:32 AM, "Badru Ntege" <ntegeb at one2net.co.ug> wrote:
>You see there has been a claim that current policies will allow for
>Afrinic resources to be taken of the continent and thus bringing this
>policy in will keep the resources on the continent. The point below i
>believe refutes this justification completely.
>On Jun 26, 2013, at 10:58 AM, Alan Barrett <apb at cequrux.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Badru Ntege wrote:
>>> There is nothing stoping this institution now using the resources to
>>>set up a local for profit ISP, or even passing these resources to a
>>>third party that will take them off the continent.
>> See the existing IPv4 allocation policy, AFPUB-2005-V4-001, section 9.5:
>> " 9.5 Validity of an assignment
>> " Assignments remain valid as long as the original criteria
>> " on which the assignment was based are still in place and
>> " the assignment is registered in the AFRINIC database. An
>> " assignment is therefore invalid if it is not registered in the
>> " database and if the purpose for which it was registered has
>> " changed or no longer holds.
>> An attempt to transfer of resources clearly invalidates the assignment
>>under clause 9.4 of AFPUB-2005-V4-001. I would argue that a mission
>>change on the part of the organisation (such as serving as a for-profit
>>ISP), would also invalidate the assignment under that clause.
>So with these safe guards how will people get resources from AfriNIC and
>take them off the continent as is being claimed to support the policy ??
>if the rules are the same then that point as justification for us to
>legalize hoarding of resources through this policy should not be used.
>> --apb (Alan Barrett)
>> rpd mailing list
>> rpd at afrinic.net
>rpd mailing list
>rpd at afrinic.net
More information about the RPD