Search RPD Archives
[AFRINIC-rpd] Commencement of the last call
Andrew Alston
alston.networks at gmail.com
Wed Jun 26 11:30:09 UTC 2013
Hi Dewole,
My problem with this is that this again disadvantages the institutions who
are rolling out slowly, and could end up in a situation where they get none,
and does nothing to address the imbalance of space where the poorer
institutions are still hugely disadvantaged in the fact that they have to
apply multiple times to get to the same level as their counterparts. Also
"enough addresses for the projected rollout" becomes a point of contention
and debate with AfriNIC staff, because once again the issue of concurrency
rears its head when you are attempting to rollout wireless networks.
I remind this list that the original policy proposed a ratio of 3:1 and it
was at the request of this list and this community that we raised that to a
5:1, indicating that the community on this list believed that the 3:1 ratio
was infact to low.
Andrew
From: Dewole Ajao <dewole at forum.org.ng>
Date: Wednesday 26 June 2013 1:15 PM
To: Andrew Alston <alston.networks at gmail.com>
Cc: Walubengo J <jwalu at yahoo.com>, Maye Diop <mayediop at gmail.com>, rpd
<rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Commencement of the last call
A few constructive modifications to this policy have been suggested and as a
PDP newbie, I'm interested in seeing the most recent revision of the draft
as the website still carries DRAFT-02. Apologies for my ignorance if it's
already somewhere I'm not aware of.
In the past couple of hours, I have seen just one reasonable fear and I
believe it is easy to fix this.
The fear was:
* That the proposed policy will allow some institutions take up IPv4
addresses to the detriment of late-movers that are yet to request
allocations.
Suggested fix: Authors should revise the policy so that allocations are
based not solely on the number of students enrolled but also on a reasonable
phased plan for rollout (as per existing policy). Afrinic can first allocate
enough addresses for say Year 1 of projected rollout. If institutions need
more in subsequent years after rollout, they can request more with evidence
that 80% utilization has been reached.
Phasing the allocations can be likened to the use of small plates at an
all-you-can-eat-buffet; go eat then come back to the queue when you're done.
Everyone in the room (hopefully) gets to eat a portion.
I hope this is helpful so we can move forward.
Dewole.
From: "Andrew Alston" <alston.networks at gmail.com>
To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu at yahoo.com>, "Maye Diop" <mayediop at gmail.com>, "rpd"
<rpd at afrinic.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 11:11:01 AM
Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Commencement of the last call
Hi Walu,
Nice to see you on the list and joining our lively debate :)
> I hope this does not turn out to be a one-to-one match :-)
I hope that is not the case, I believe we should be debating this policy on
technical merits and in the view to what is in the best interests of the
entire continent.
> 1. The policy is not good since it seems to favour certain orgarnizations
(academia) - the risk here being that soon or later, other specialized
organisations may come up with their own specialized policies as well. Think
of
Churches, Political Parties, Youth, Football groups etc :-)
I can understand this concern, however, it needs to be stated that any such
policy would need to pass through the PDP as this one is. If the community
found consensus for such things, then as a community organisation AfriNIC
should not oppose it. That is what the policy process is there for, to
build policy that the community wants. However, if a specialised
organisation could not gain the consensus of the community such a policy
would be rejected. This mitigates this concern in my mind since anyone is
free to propose any policy and put it through the process.
> 2. The Policy is good in that it makes it easier for Universities to quickly
get IP addresses - which is a good thing since Universities tend to be the
safest custodian and best consumers of IP resources amongst all other
potential
organisations.
100% agreed.
> I also see Maye's point that it could be that Southern region (read SA), East
African region (read Kenyan) & perhaps West Africa region (read Nigerian)
Universities maybe the ones who may "rush" for these IP
> resources at the expense of the other regions(countries). I think it is a
valid point and the most likely outcome of this policy.
I do not understand this point, at all. There has even been a South African
institution on the list stating they would not need to take advantage of it.
Those who have space have no real need of this policy and based on emails I
have put forward earlier in this discussion, it is actually harder for those
that have to qualify for large amounts of space under this policy. However,
in Ethiopia there sits one HEI that I know of that has a single /30 for the
entire University. This policy would allow for that to change, it would
give them the space they need. Those who do NOT have space, need it, and
this policy makes it far easier for them to get it. The policy
significantly advantages those who currently have little or nothing, and I
believe that that is in the best interests of the entire continent, as it
creates a far more equal playing field and balances things removing the
historical advantage from those who already have resources.
Andrew
From: Andrew Alston <alston.networks at gmail.com>
To: Maye Diop <mayediop at gmail.com>; rpd <rpd at afrinic.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Commencement of the last call
Thanks Maye,
I sent that privately but as I said in it, you are welcome to share my
concerns with the list.
I stand by what I have said there, that I do not understand your motives,
and that I believe strongly that this policy is in the best interests of the
African continent as a whole and that is what I fight for. And I hope that
we are NOT seeing a divide such as what this is beginning to look like
Andrew
From: Maye Diop <mayediop at gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday 26 June 2013 11:19 AM
To: rpd <rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: Fwd: [AFRINIC-rpd] Commencement of the last call
FYI
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Andrew Alston <alston.networks at gmail.com>
Date: 2013/6/26
Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Commencement of the last call
To: Maye Diop <mayediop at gmail.com>
Sent off listŠ your decision to take it back to the list or notŠ.
; ii) his focus on south region without any provision of equity;
Is this the REAL reason for your opposition? Not on technical grounds, not
on financial grounds, not on any other grounds, but because you oppose
something that is not coming out of your own region? Even though we have
shown and demonstrated that it will benefit your own region more than the
Southern or Eastern regions? I am now openly asking you, is this a
geo-political issue or a language issue or a racial issue? Because if that
is the case, I would be extremely saddened to find that Africa once again
cannot work together because of prejudice based on location, ethnicity,
language, tribal association or any other.
I believe, strongly, that this policy is in the benefit of the continent as
a whole, and I might point out, I actually spend VERY little time in the
southern region these days, most of my work is with the commercials in East
Africa, though I was involved in actively supporting and fighting for the
IPv6 task force in Senegal, have presented in Ghana, have spent time in
Gambia, and have always demonstrated throughout my career that my focus has
been Africa centric rather then South Africa centric.
However, your statements and your views come across to me, and others who
have expressed this view to me, as being extremely guided by issues that are
not actually related to the policy and I question those motives (and am
quite prepared to debate that on list if you so choose)
Andrew
2013/6/26 Alan Barrett <apb at cequrux.com>
> 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.
>
> --apb (Alan Barrett)
>
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
> <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd>
--
---------------------
Mme Ndéye Maimouna DIOP
Spécialiste ICT4D
_______________________________________________ rpd mailing list
rpd at afrinic.nethttps://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
--
---------------------
Mme Ndéye Maimouna DIOP
Spécialiste ICT4D
_______________________________________________ rpd mailing list
rpd at afrinic.nethttps://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
rpd at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
rpd at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
Hi Walu,
Nice to see you on the list and joining our lively debate :)
> I hope this does not turn out to be a one-to-one match :-)
I hope that is not the case, I believe we should be debating this policy on
technical merits and in the view to what is in the best interests of the
entire continent.
> 1. The policy is not good since it seems to favour certain orgarnizations
(academia) - the risk here being that soon or later, other specialized
organisations may come up with their own specialized policies as well. Think of
Churches, Political Parties, Youth, Football groups etc :-)
I can understand this concern, however, it needs to be stated that any such
policy would need to pass through the PDP as this one is. If the community
found consensus for such things, then as a community organisation AfriNIC
should not oppose it. That is what the policy process is there for, to
build policy that the community wants. However, if a specialised
organisation could not gain the consensus of the community such a policy
would be rejected. This mitigates this concern in my mind since anyone is
free to propose any policy and put it through the process.
> 2. The Policy is good in that it makes it easier for Universities to quickly
get IP addresses - which is a good thing since Universities tend to be the
safest custodian and best consumers of IP resources amongst all other potential
organisations.
100% agreed.
> I also see Maye's point that it could be that Southern region (read SA), East
African region (read Kenyan) & perhaps West Africa region (read Nigerian)
Universities maybe the ones who may "rush" for these IP
> resources at the expense of the other regions(countries). I think it is a
valid point and the most likely outcome of this policy.
I do not understand this point, at all. There has even been a South African
institution on the list stating they would not need to take advantage of it.
Those who have space have no real need of this policy and based on emails I
have put forward earlier in this discussion, it is actually harder for those
that have to qualify for large amounts of space under this policy. However,
in Ethiopia there sits one HEI that I know of that has a single /30 for the
entire University. This policy would allow for that to change, it would
give them the space they need. Those who do NOT have space, need it, and
this policy makes it far easier for them to get it. The policy
significantly advantages those who currently have little or nothing, and I
believe that that is in the best interests of the entire continent, as it
creates a far more equal playing field and balances things removing the
historical advantage from those who already have resources.
Andrew
From: Andrew Alston <alston.networks at gmail.com>
To: Maye Diop <mayediop at gmail.com>; rpd <rpd at afrinic.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Commencement of the last call
Thanks Maye,
I sent that privately but as I said in it, you are welcome to share my
concerns with the list.
I stand by what I have said there, that I do not understand your motives,
and that I believe strongly that this policy is in the best interests of the
African continent as a whole and that is what I fight for. And I hope that
we are NOT seeing a divide such as what this is beginning to look like
Andrew
From: Maye Diop <mayediop at gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday 26 June 2013 11:19 AM
To: rpd <rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: Fwd: [AFRINIC-rpd] Commencement of the last call
FYI
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Andrew Alston <alston.networks at gmail.com>
Date: 2013/6/26
Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Commencement of the last call
To: Maye Diop <mayediop at gmail.com>
Sent off list... your decision to take it back to the list or not....
; ii) his focus on south region without any provision of equity;
Is this the REAL reason for your opposition? Not on technical grounds, not
on financial grounds, not on any other grounds, but because you oppose
something that is not coming out of your own region? Even though we have
shown and demonstrated that it will benefit your own region more than the
Southern or Eastern regions? I am now openly asking you, is this a
geo-political issue or a language issue or a racial issue? Because if that
is the case, I would be extremely saddened to find that Africa once again
cannot work together because of prejudice based on location, ethnicity,
language, tribal association or any other.
I believe, strongly, that this policy is in the benefit of the continent as
a whole, and I might point out, I actually spend VERY little time in the
southern region these days, most of my work is with the commercials in East
Africa, though I was involved in actively supporting and fighting for the
IPv6 task force in Senegal, have presented in Ghana, have spent time in
Gambia, and have always demonstrated throughout my career that my focus has
been Africa centric rather then South Africa centric.
However, your statements and your views come across to me, and others who
have expressed this view to me, as being extremely guided by issues that are
not actually related to the policy and I question those motives (and am
quite prepared to debate that on list if you so choose)
Andrew
2013/6/26 Alan Barrett <apb at cequrux.com>
> 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.
>
> --apb (Alan Barrett)
>
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
> <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd>
--
---------------------
Mme Ndéye Maimouna DIOP
Spécialiste ICT4D
_______________________________________________ rpd mailing list
rpd at afrinic.nethttps://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
--
---------------------
Mme Ndéye Maimouna DIOP
Spécialiste ICT4D
_______________________________________________ rpd mailing list
rpd at afrinic.nethttps://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
rpd at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20130626/0e2ac7e2/attachment.html>
More information about the RPD
mailing list