Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Some thoughts, and some actions required
owen at delong.com
Fri Jan 29 18:06:38 UTC 2016
> On Jan 29, 2016, at 08:23 , Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
> Hi Janvier,
> The term secondary market has become commonly used globally. Transfer policies are specific to each RIR though, and while the RIR’s other than AfriNIC each have one (or are developing one), they do differ in certain areas. (Specifically, to my knowledge RIPE has largely abandoned needs based justification, ARIN has not yet done this, but it is in the works)
Actually RIPE (sort of) restored needs based justification to their transfer policy. They did it in the least useful way possible, but it was just enough lip service to meet the so-called compatibility test in the ARIN policy for inter-RIR transfers.
While there have been and continue to be policy proposals in the ARIN region aimed at converting the IPv4 registry from a registry into an auction house, none have succeeded so far, so I would say that claims that abandoning needs based justification in the ARIN region is “in the works” are exaggerated at best.
APNIC also restored needs based justification to their transfer policy some time ago.
> As such, I’m not really concerned about using the term in a policy within AfriNIC.
> Searching for the term, I see the same term used in APNIC, RIPE, the international media, and various other places.
The term secondary market is fine, but probably doesn’t really belong in the policy text.
Further, this would not be a global policy, it would be an AfriNIC policy. There is no global policy and no need for a global policy regarding transfers.
Global policies are for things that control interactions between IANA<->RIRs.
This policy would work in cooperation with existing policies at other RIRs each of which is a local policy to the specific RIR.
The way the others are currently set up (APNIC, RIPE, ARIN) is that the receiving RIR transfer policy is controlling for qualifying the recipient and the sending RIR transfer policy is controlling for qualifying the donor. The transfer is effected when the respective RIRs agree with each other that the donor and recipient have met their respective qualifications.
Now, the can of worms here is that I believe a compatible policy should have to be bidirectional. This would give AfriNIC access to the world’s secondary market, but it would also enable the transfer of addresses out of the AfriNIC region. Under the circumstances, I think this community should think long and hard about whether that is a desirable outcome.
> The rest of the world has openly acknowledged that a secondary market exists, and has largely embraced it, for the good of all concerned, we now need to do the same thing, or get hurt in the process. We have to be in a position to get space after AfriNIC runs out, either from international sellers or from other African entities that choose to enter the market as sellers. We cannot end up in a situation where it is impossible to get new space as African companies, and that is where we are heading without such a policy. (Well, they will still be able to partake as buyers, but they will be forced to go and take membership of another RIR and register the space internationally, which kinda defeats the point of an African RIR, since it will result in a flood of offshore entities and money flowing off the continent if we force that route by not having a transfer policy).
These are all valid points and yet I can’t help but wonder given the relative economies between the regions how much space would flow into Africa vs. out.
I have no dog in this fight, so I’m not opposed to the proposal, nor am I in favor. However, I do want the community to weigh all of the aspects of this action, including the potential benefits and the possible problems that can result prior to making a decision.
I would also strongly encourage the community not to personify the argument. I genuinely believe that each person is trying to move AfriNIC in what they see as the best direction for the community at large and I think everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt on that even if we do not agree with their vision. This community includes many diverse perspectives and good people can in good faith com to different conclusions when presented with the same circumstances. It is easy to determine who had the best vision in hindsight, but when looking forward, we are deprived of this benefit.
> From: "jnoulaye at yahoo.fr <mailto:jnoulaye at yahoo.fr>" <jnoulaye at yahoo.fr <mailto:jnoulaye at yahoo.fr>>
> Reply-To: "jnoulaye at yahoo.fr <mailto:jnoulaye at yahoo.fr>" <jnoulaye at yahoo.fr <mailto:jnoulaye at yahoo.fr>>
> Date: Friday, 29 January 2016 at 7:03 PM
> To: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com <mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>>, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com <mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com>>, "rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>" <rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>>
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Some thoughts, and some actions required
> De : Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com <mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>>
> I am NOT proposing a transfer policy from RIR to RIR, I am proposing a transfer policy to allow us access to the secondary markets of the world in both directions.
> Andrew, I think the concept sounds good but the word "secondary market" is welcome into a global policy ?
> Janvier Ngnoulaye
> From: McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com <mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com>>
> Date: Friday, 29 January 2016 at 4:17 PM
> To: "rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>" <rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>>
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Some thoughts, and some actions required
> Where would African LIRs transfer from if the rest of the world depletes before us (as is the case).
> Is the intent of a transfer policy the ability to transfer out? If not, I don't think I would be in favor.
> I would be happy to support a modification to Soft Landing to restrict size/number of allocations.
> I think we can get it done quickly if we all work together in the spirit of cooperation that brought AFRINIC into being in the first place.
> AFRINIC en avant!
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 4:59 AM, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com <mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>> wrote:
>> I’m not convinced there will be much space coming via that route.
>> With the transfer markets open all over the world other than in Africa, who is going to return space to IANA for them to give to AfriNIC when they can sell it?
>> Andrew Alston
>> Group Head of IP Strategy
>> Sameer business Park, Block A, Mombasa Road. Nairobi, Kenya
>> T: +254 205000000 <applewebdata://E0D9A06F-E605-49FE-B4F0-152DEED18AC2> - M: +254 733 2222 04 <applewebdata://E0D9A06F-E605-49FE-B4F0-152DEED18AC2> - E: andrew.alston at liquidtelecom.com <mailto:andrew.alston at liquidtelecom.com>
>> On 29/01/2016, 11:04 AM, "Mwendwa Kivuva" <Kivuva at transworldafrica.com <mailto:Kivuva at transworldafrica.com>> wrote:
>> >In reference to the Policy authored by Michuki et-al on reserving a
>> >small v4 for IXPs, why not just write a new policy to "create a
>> >smaller IPv6 transition pool using the IANA returned space AfriNIC
>> >will receive over subsequent months"
>> >On 29/01/2016, Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz <mailto:geier at geier.ne.tz>> wrote:
>> >> Hi all,
>> >> My first thought about this was:
>> >> We (on this list, but not everyone) have seen the iceberg; we can adjust
>> >> course but only change the time of impact slightly; should we rearrange
>> >> the deck chairs?
>> >> However, things can change. ;-)
>> >> I'm in favour of having a transfer policy.
>> >> I don't see why it should only get into effect when one or another
>> >> soft-landing policy phase kicks in. Why not as soon as possible?
>> >> If there are two consenting adul.... I mean
>> >> Internet-numbering-resource-holders, then fine.
>> >> I'm in favour of more restricting allocations during soft landing.
>> >> maybe
>> >> 1. any organisation (member) can only get an allocation/assignment if
>> >> they didn't get one for the previous 12 months
>> >> (minimum time distance, number can be adjusted)
>> >> or
>> >> 2. any organisation (member) can only once get an allocation/assignment
>> >> for phase 1, I think any of these 2 options is fine,
>> >> for phase 2, I prefer option 2.
>> >> I'm happy to reduce the "/13" in 3.5.1) EXHAUSTION PHASE 1
>> >> to be smaller. In the range /16 - /18 (to be fixed during discussion)
>> >> Two concerns:
>> >> a) we're spending effort for a technology on life support
>> >> (actually the effort is the life support)
>> >> We should spend as much effort for _____________
>> >> b) I haven't checked Andrew's scary timeline predictions.
>> >> I'm unsure policy can make it that quickly.
>> >> Just look at the success rate of recent policies, number of meetings
>> >> for discussing the same policy. I'm also aware of policies that are
>> >> not implemented more than half a year after the successful policy
>> >> discussion in the meeting...
>> >> At the very least it will need a change of culture.
>> >> so that any input will need to be shared on email before the policy
>> >> meeting. In order that no new surprising arguments for wording,
>> >> parameters, bike-shed colours are coming up only at the meeting.
>> >> Any questions about the policy can be shared on email and doesn't
>> >> need to wait for the meeting .... etc....
>> >> Greetings,
>> >> Frank
>> >> On 1/28/2016 6:25 PM, Andrew Alston wrote:
>> >>> Hi All,
>> >>> So, I was analysing some of the latest publicly available numbers on
>> >>> AfriNIC space and allocations. What follows is a summary of that
>> >>> analysis, and then some points that need to be discussed.
>> >>> AFRINIC as of the last report I have seen had 30.6 million addresses
>> >>> still available (This may have dropped since that figure came out).
>> >>> AFRINIC allocated 16.9 million addresses last year.
>> >>> The allocation rates for 2015 are up 35% from 2014, and in 2015 and 2014
>> >>> combined we allocated a total of 29.4 million addresses. This is
>> >>> approximately double what was allocated in 2012 and 2013 combined.
>> >>> Based on a 35% increase in the rate of allocation from 2015, and there
>> >>> is little reason to doubt this will happen, we will be in soft landing
>> >>> in July of this year approximately.
>> >>> Due to the fact that the current soft landing policy still allows
>> >>> extremely large allocations, this will not significantly slow down the
>> >>> allocation rates, and if anything, moving into soft landing may well
>> >>> spur more people into action and applications, which could actually
>> >>> INCREASE the rate of allocation. Should the allocation rate remain
>> >>> unchanged, Africa is out of space by late March/Beginning April 2017.
>> >>> Now, things to consider.
>> >>> A.) The soft landing policy ideally needs to be changed to drastically
>> >>> tighten the allocations in the soft landing phases, and if we plan to do
>> >>> this, we have ONE chance to get it right, and that’s in Gaborone. If we
>> >>> fail to pass a modification to that policy at the Gaborone meeting later
>> >>> this year, there will be no more time left to do anything to prevent
>> >>> total depletion.
>> >>> B.) Total depletion is coming, and nothing can stop it, and we no longer
>> >>> have years of IP space left in the AfriNIC pool. This means that
>> >>> without a transfer policy of some form of another, be it intra-RIR or
>> >>> inter-RIR, anyone who does not get space within this period, will not be
>> >>> able to get space within the AfriNIC region, at all. (Unless they go
>> >>> and join out of region RIR’s and transfer to the entities they register
>> >>> in those out of region RIRs, but it will be an entirely off continent
>> >>> process).
>> >>> So, we can continue to sit and argue with our heads in the sand, or we
>> >>> can realise, we have one more policy meeting left before soft landing,
>> >>> and possibly one more meeting after that before total depletion with the
>> >>> current policies. We either leave all politics that normally is so
>> >>> pervasive in the discussions behind and make some meaningful strides
>> >>> towards serious policy change, or we fully accept that the end of IPv4
>> >>> is here and we are going over the cliff, like it or not. There are no
>> >>> other options.
>> >>> So, lets discuss, how do we deal with what is coming. Let me also
>> >>> state, the argument that was made in Pointe Noir that some how AfriNIC
>> >>> will save us from depletion is completely inaccurate. AfriNIC as an
>> >>> organisation cannot act outside of the auspicious of policy, and that
>> >>> means the community as a whole, has to work together if they want
>> >>> change, or accept that together we run of out space and do whatever
>> >>> needs to be done after that day.
>> >>> Written entirely in my personal capacity.
>> >>> Andrew Alston
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> RPD mailing list
>> >>> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
>> >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> RPD mailing list
>> >> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
>> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>
>> >Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya
>> >twitter.com/lordmwesh <http://twitter.com/lordmwesh>
>> >The best athletes never started as the best athletes.
>> >"You miss 100 percent of the shots you never take." - Wayne Gretzky.
>> >I will persist until I succeed - Og Mandino.
>> >RPD mailing list
>> >RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
>> >https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD