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

[rpd] Re: [members-discuss] Virtual Africa is the logical target for IP address colonists

Seun Ojedeji seun.ojedeji at
Thu Jun 19 08:08:40 UTC 2014

Hello Kofi,

On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 2:30 AM, Kofi ansa akufo <kofi.ansa at>

> Hello All
> It seems for some reason I have missed out on the mail-lists (both
> members-discuss and rpd) discussions. Perhaps been blocked from the lists
> due to criticism.

Don't think so because i am receiving this mail through the list. Besides,
i don't see why such will be done. Nevertheless it could be worth exploring
if you think otherwise.


> What I am driving at is to stop drafting "Policies" that will stop
> prospective business to get our internet resources

Can you define prospective business in this context? is it a business that
intends to use the resources outside of this region OR a business that
intends to use it in this region?

> but rather consider policies that will enable the continent take advantage
> of the huge backbone capacity to improve infrastructure and education.
> Policies that will indirectly spark collaborations to address problems such
> as NOT having enough, cheap and reliable POWER to make new emerging
> businesses such as data centers to flourish in our region.

Me thinks this is what we all have been alluding to...generally creating
policies that improves development in our region.

> Those are the major consumers of internet resources in the other regions.
> "What is the use of a father holding on to funds whilst his kids stay at
> home not going to school - whilst he ignorantly keeps on telling everyone
> he is saving for their future welfare" - AFRINIC's struggle to remain as a
> "relevant"  not-for-profit organization will be in vain if we dont adapt an
> open approach to collaborate to resolve the issues.

Do you have a suggestion on other open approach to collaborating apart from
the rpd list and public policy meeting?

>  The organization even faces more challenges especially when it is left at
> the mercy of few people who are not open to criticism and seek to rather
> coverup issues rather than address them objectively.

Not sure i got this part, are we still talking about proper management of
our IP resource?

> IPv4 will inevitably be exhausted so the question is NOT WHAT but How is
> AfriNIC trainings (especially IPv6) impacting on the adoption of the larger
> address space by our community members. How many training sessions have
> been conducted in the past 3 years and how many service provider attendants
> at these sessions have moved on to deploy v6  on their network? How many of
> the service providers and carriers who are members of the community have
> deployed native v6? What are the challenges they face - is it financial? is
> it technical?

There is a saying that you can take a horse to the river but you can't
force it to drink. Me and you are all concerned that ISPs are not
deploying/integrating v6 at a desired rate, however me and you also know
that there is a limit of enforcement that the RIR can do. Nevertheless, i
agree that it may be good to explore the possible barriers. Although at
this point, i doubt its on technical expertise reason.

> We should stop hiding behind "you can force a horse to the river but you
> cant force it to drink"

Wow! i had just used this proverb up there ;)


> I believe the management structure needs to be reviewed right from the top
> in the organisation - "heads must roll" - if necessary.

This will be up to the AFRINIC members/board to determine. Nevertheless if
the larger PDWG thinks some part of the policy is not being adhered to, it
will be good to hear those specifics.


> Cheers
> K.
> On 18 June 2014 22:58, Adiel Akplogan <adiel at> wrote:
> > [I think that the discussion has taken a path which now need it to be
> moved to the rpd list]
> >
> > On Jun 18, 2014, at 17:13 PM, Douglas Onyango <ondouglas at>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 18 June 2014 12:02, Adiel Akplogan <adiel at> wrote:
> >>> In this discussion I don't think the real challenge is about
> organisations that already have a well established footprint in the region
> trying to expend their network out of Africa, but rather about how far an
> IP Analyst can go using his/her own judgment in cases where a company (new
> or not) recently decide to enter the IP service business/market and is
> requesting resources that will obviously be used in majority (up to 5%-90%
> as we already seen) outside of the region.
> >>
> >> I agree with the problem description. I have said the same thing in a
> >> previous email and also mentioned that the policy I am drafting will
> >> strike a balance between the two interests.
> >
> > Good to hear this.
> >
> > - a.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rpd mailing list
> > rpd at
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at


*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:
<> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at
<seun.ojedeji at>*

The key to understanding is humility - my view !
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list