Search RPD Archives
[rpd] LACNIC reaches final /10 of IPv4 space
Mark Elkins
mje at posix.co.za
Wed Jun 11 07:39:24 UTC 2014
The fact that a number of Board people have concerns and have voiced
them is good - it shows where their hearts are. I too (in my personal
capacity) have concerns on the slow adoption of IPv6 within the AFRINIC
service region.
I also don't like our IPv4 resources being used outside of our service
region by entities without African roots yet at the same time wish we
had a lot less left.
1 - What about "except for the very first allocation/assignment, No more
IPv4 until the member has their own IPv6 from AFRINIC, visible in the
routing table" ???
Would love to add that if the members upstream(s) do not support IPv6
connectivity to the member, no more IPv4 for them either.
2 - What about "for the second last /8, anyone acquiring addresses from
this pool has to prove (onus on the member) that more than half of their
existing addresses are used on equipment within the AFRINIC service
region" ???
3 - I also think a reservation policy might be useful for large
requests.
Client wants a /12, AFRINIC can reserve the whole /12 but only issues
a /16 of it - for use in "chicken and egg" cases... where funding might
not be (fully) approved until resources are secured. The rest of the /12
is issued later (on qualification) as part of the same job.
(I use /12 and /16 purely as examples)
On Wed, 2014-06-11 at 09:43 +0400, Kris Seeburn wrote:
> There are two ends to it.
>
>
> * We either look at a policy to protect our ipv4 space which
> would actually defeat the full push of ipv6
> * Or we find ways to deplete our ipv4 space faster that we can
> move to ipv6 faster
>
>
> We all know that most hosting / ecom sites are still based on ipv4
> infrastructure though. As much as we need to protect the ipv4 space we
> still need to push the ipv6 space. Afrinic nevertheless still has a
> good deal of ipv4 space. The question is how do we move both agenda
> forward?
>
>
> I think obviously we need to look at our policy and what can make
> things work for us. A sharing or sales of ipv4 space with other RIRs
> as need may also look as a better way of still protecting the precious
> space whilst still making money out of it. I am not sure. I think this
> is still a dilemma we all need to figure out.
>
>
> NB: This is not a board perspective but my personal take at it.
>
>
> Kris
>
> On Jun 11, 2014, at 9:17 AM, Bope Domilongo Christian
> <christianbope at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thank you Alan and seun, this an important milestone, having a
> > policy to protect our critical resources will be great.
> >
> >
> > With best regards,
> >
> > writing on my personal capacity.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 4:13 AM, Seun Ojedeji
> > <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for this update Alan, from all indication it will
> > seem that v4 exhaustion time within AfriNIC region may be
> > sooner than earlier predicted.
> >
> > Should this region be worried?... maybe:
> > - More content in those region where v4 is getting exhausted
> > will go v6 but then v6 deployment in our region is
> > relatively low (someone says there is translation to the
> > rescue)
> > - Our region will continue to experience an increase in v4
> > requests from organizations that are more domicile in
> > regions with v4 exhaustion. Perhaps this could be an
> > opportunity to "by policy" improve ISP establishment in our
> > region? Maybe yes. Should we also "by policy" ensure
> > addresses within this region are used more within the
> > region.... how do we encourage this as the region seem to be
> > comfortable with *translation*. Can policy make this happen?
> >
> > Cheers!
> > PS: My views alone.
> > sent from Google nexus 4
> > kindly excuse brevity and typos.
> >
> > On 10 Jun 2014 17:23, "Alan Barrett" <apb at cequrux.com>
> > wrote:
> > Three weeks ago, on 20 May 2014, LACNIC's available
> > pool of IPv4 space became less then a /9
> > equivalent. This triggered the activation of IANA's
> > Recovered IPv4 Pool in terms of Global Policy
> > GPP-IPv4-2011.
> >
> > Today, 10 June 2014, LACNIC's available pool of IPv4
> > space became less than a /10 equivalent (4194302
> > IPv4 addresses). This triggers LACNIC's IPv4
> > exhaustion policy.
> >
> > Announcements from 20 May 2014:
> > <http://www.nro.net/news/lacnics-ipv4-address-pool-now-down-to-a-9>
> > <http://www.nro.net/news/iana-allocates-recovered-ipv4-addresses-to-rir>
> >
> > Announcement from 10 Jun 2014:
> > <http://www.lacnic.net/en/web/anuncios/2014-no-hay-mas-direcciones-ipv4-en-lac>
> >
> > --apb (Alan Barrett)
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rpd mailing list
> > rpd at afrinic.net
> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>
> Kris Seeburn
> seeburn.k at gmail.com
> *
> www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
--
Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa
mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5810 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20140611/21b10768/attachment.bin>
More information about the RPD
mailing list