[rpd] Some thoughts, and some actions required

[Owen DeLong]

> On Feb 2, 2016, at 10:30 , Mukom Akong T. <mukom.tamon at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2 February 2016 at 21:26, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com <mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
>> On Feb 2, 2016, at 05:20 , Mukom Akong T. <mukom.tamon at gmail.com <mailto:mukom.tamon at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> **Wearing NO Hats**
>> 
>> 
>> Markets are quite effective at moving resources from where they are not needed to where they are more highly needed/demanded. This community has always been against a transfer policy because of the perception (correct or incorrect) that a transfer policy opens the way for legal plundering of AFRINIC resources. What policy requirements should be considered to allay that fear ?
> 
> This is only partly true…
> 
> Markets are very good at optimizing resource distribution to maximize revenue for the resource holders. This is not always the direct profitability of the resources themselves, however. In a constrained market (a limited quantity of a non-substitutable commodity, a limited number of consumers/suppliers, etc.) where the commodity in question is a vital resource used in support of unrelated commerce (as is the case with IP addresses), there may be value not only in possessing adequate resources to support one’s business, but also potential value in depriving one’s competitors of sufficient resources.
> 
> Fortunately, IPv4 addresses are not completely non-substitutable… They are currently partially substitutable with IPv6 addresses and the extent of this substitutability is growing fairly quickly.
> 
> 
> 
> I think we are on the same side :-)

We almost always are.

> 
> * I used resources in my statement above in the general sense (the thing to be sold and the money) rather than the sense of Internet number resources.

That was understood.

> * Africa's under-utilisation of a resource to which it only has a tiny amount indicates to me that resource (v4 address) are more value in other parts of the world than here. Thus a market might facilitate the movement of those resources out of the continent (while earning some $$ for the holders)

While that is certainly a valid perspective and most definitely the one which Ayn Rand would hold, I would argue that perhaps that resource rather than being more valuable in other parts of the world, instead represents an underdevelopment of the African Internet capabilities. I doubt there is anyone who would argue that Africa is not one of the most underserved populations in terms of internet access. Worse, there are many providers in the region that not only expect their customers to use NAT, but inflict NAT on their customers at the provider level for reasons passing understanding. I’m not sure whether that is the result of a
fiscal, educational, or cultural problem. Perhaps all three are in play.

> 
> I am now of a mixed mind on the plundering of the AfriNIC free pool.
> 
> On the one hand, it will deprive the continent of IPv4 addresses. On the other hand, this privation may serve to push Africa from the very back of the pack on IPv6 adoption to an aggressive deployment and a leadership position. This would be very disruptive in the short run, but may actually serve to create a better circumstance in the long run.
> 
> 
> I've heard this sentiment too often in different countries ... perhaps if we no longer suffered from the delusion of "AFRINIC still has quite a large number of IPv4 addresses", then people might wake up to start doing the right and sustainable thing.

It does seem to be working to a limited extent in North America.

> 
> At the end of the day, I don’t really have a dog in this fight. I just want to make sure that as the community considers these policy matters, they are making an informed decision based on the facts as they exist rather than conjecture or erroneous information.
> 
> Thank you as always for your insights which enable the community make sensible policy. In a nutshell, what you and I both describe is at the foundation of the fear that the community has always had about a transfer policy.  

I do, to some extent share that fear. However, I also fear what will happen as a result of the erroneous perception that IPv4 is sustainable as a result of AfriNIC having a much longer run of free pool than anywhere else.

Regardless of how the policy shakes out, I do think that it is good that Andrew has pointed out that the runway is much shorter than everyone was thinking and getting shorter very quickly.

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20160202/ff18a287/attachment-0001.html>