[rpd] Proposal Update (was: Re: New Proposal - "Soft Landing - BIS (AFPUB-2016-V4-001-DRAFT-02)"

Tue Feb 23 22:49:31 UTC 2016

Dear Community,

This policy addresses  the majority of the fears that has been expressed by
the community during last months.

- Increase of allocation rate of IPV4 point out in stats shared by Andrew
by strengthening allocation requirement and I support the  inclusion
of  explicit
limit on the number of times an organization may request additional IPv4
address space during Exhaustion Phase 1.

- Foster sustainable environment that will allow Internet development in
Africa.

In fact IPv6 adoption is a must but  in early stage of IPv4 Post
exhaustion, dual stack will be required. Reserve for new entrant will
guarantee that new entrant supposed to have less exposure to IPV6 will get
IPV4 ressources needed to deploy their network.

- Secondary Market, *"AFRINIC resources are for AFRINIC service region and
any use outside the region should be solely in support of connectivity back
to the AFRINIC region"*.

As a community driven and non lucrative organization, we can't afford to
set conditions that will legitimate IPv4 address sale on the black market.

I support this proposal.

Kind Regards.

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Fabrice BAGOLIBE <fabrig10 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi All!
> The proposal of M. Aina has my consent too
>
> Best regards
>
> --Fabrice
>
>
> Le 23/02/2016 20:47, Emmanuel Togo a écrit :
>
> Hi All
> I  support  this proposal.
> I like the idea of reserving some block for critical infrastructure and
> late comers.
>
> Regards
> Togo
>
> Sent from my Samsung device
> -------- Original message --------
> From: ALAIN AINA <aalain at trstech.net> <aalain at trstech.net>
> Date: 23/02/2016 13:16 (GMT+00:00)
> To: AfriNIC List <rpd at afrinic.net> <rpd at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Proposal Update (was: Re: New Proposal - "Soft Landing
> - BIS (AFPUB-2016-V4-001-DRAFT-02)"
>
> Hello All,
>
> Thank you all for your interest in our policy proposal.  Some of the
> impressions being created about what it sets out to achieve are incorrect.
>
> The IPv4 softlanding-bis policy proposal does not intend to extend IPv4
> lifetime at AFRINIC.
>
> The policy proposal stays in the spirit of the global Global Policy for
> the Allocation of the remaining IPv4 address pool:
> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/policies/135-afpub-2009-v4-001 (section
> 2 and 3) and the current IPv4 soft landing policy
> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/policies/697-ipv4-soft-landing-policy
> (section 3).
>
> The proposal makes sure the distribution of the final /8 [102/8] is fair
> enough based on the current consumption rate, assures availability of IPv4
> to new comers, to Critical Internet Infrastructure as well as to the
> current players as we go through the transition to IPv6.
>
> To achieve this, it says :
>
> - during  phase 1,  move the maximum from /10 to /15.
>
> http://afrinic.net/en/services/rs/membership-fees shows the member
> categories and /15 is the median which covers majority of AFRINIC
> membership as shown at
> <http://www.afrinic.net/en/services/statistics/membership>
> http://www.afrinic.net/en/services/statistics/membership  [members by
> Category]
>
> - during phase 2, reserve a block for new comers and for Critical Internet
> Infrastructures(new and current).  Make sure CIRs get IPv4 they need for
> their operations during the exhaustion and the transition.
>
> CIRs have been expanded to include TLDs during exhaustion phase 2. gTLDs
> are coming and ccTLDs being developed..
>
> Definition of CIR in other regions is available at :
> https://www.nro.net/rir-comparative-policy-overview/rir-comparative-policy-overview-2015-04#2-4-2
>
> Our initial thinking was that IXPs may benefit from the CIRs block during
> the phase 2 as the current reserve may not last and cover their needs at
> that time. We have no objection about  removing IXPs from CIRs.
>
> IPv6 deployment is slow. AFRNIC has the lowest rate of members with
> v4/v6[1]. During exhaustion, one must have IPv6 (from AFRINIC or upstreams
> ) when requesting IPv4.  Deployment may not be enforceable but it puts IPv6
> transition forward as the clear agenda at this time.
>
> Interested parties can view RIRs comparative “use of the final unallocated
> IPv4 address Space” can be seen at
> https://www.nro.net/rir-comparative-policy-overview/rir-comparative-policy-overview-2015-04#2-6
> The FAQ linked to the policy is at
> <http://www.afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development/policy-proposals/1627-softlanding-bis-policy-faq-v2>
> http://www.afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development/policy-proposals/1627-softlanding-bis-policy-faq-v2
>
>
> [1] https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/NRO_Q4_2015.pdf slide 16
>
>
> Hope this helps
>
> —Alain
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 21, 2016, at 10:38 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear members,
>
> This is to inform that an update has been published for this proposal.
>
> Details can be found at the following URL:
>
>
> http://afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development/policy-proposals/1625-soft-landing-bis-draft-02-
>
> ID: AFPUB-2016-V4-001-DRAFT-02
>
> Regards
> On 9 Feb 2016 2:46 p.m., "Seun Ojedeji" <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Members,
>>
>> We have received a new policy Proposal - "Soft Landing - BIS
>> (AFPUB-2016-V4-001-DRAFT-01)"
>>
>> Draft Policy name: Soft Landing - BIS
>> Unique identifier: AFPUB-2016-V4-001-DRAFT-01
>> Status: Under Discussion
>> Submission Date 06 February 2016
>> Amends:
>> AFPUB-2010-v4-005 (IPv4 soft landing policy)
>> Authors:
>> a. Omo Oaiya, omo at wacren.net, WACREN
>> b. Joe Kimaili, jkimaili at ubuntunet.net, Ubuntunet Alliance
>> c. Alain P. AINA, aalain at trstech.net, TRS
>>
>> Url:
>> https://afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development/policy-proposals/1609-soft-landing-bis
>> <http://www.afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development/policy-proposals/1157-out-of-region-use-of-afrinic-internet-number-resources>
>>
>> Text Below:
>>
>> *1) Summary of the Problem Being Addressed by this Policy Proposal *
>> The soft landing policy ratified by the board on 11/11/2011 describes how
>> AFRINIC should manage allocations/assignments from the last /8. It defines
>> 2 phases for IPv4 exhaustion. During phase 1, it sets the maximum
>> allocation/assignment to be /13 instead of /10 and in phase 2, the maximum
>> to /22 and the minimum to /24. It makes no difference between existing LIRs
>> or End-Users and new ones. The policy also does not impose IPv6 deployment.
>>
>> IPv4 exhaustion in other regions combined with other factors has imposed
>> huge pressure on the AFRINIC IPv4 pool with requests for large IPv4 blocks,
>> with very little IPv6 deployment. The pressure on the AFRINIC IPv4 pool has
>> led to some policy proposals to reserve some blocks for certain
>> sub-communities.
>>
>>
>> * 2) Summary of How this Proposal Addresses the Problem*
>>
>> This policy proposal solves the problem described above by:
>>
>>     Changing the value of the maximum allocation/assignment size during
>> the exhaustion phase 1.
>>     Imposing IPv6 resources as a pre-condition to IPv4 resource requests
>> during the exhaustion.
>>     Reserving address spaces for Critical Internet Infrastructure and new
>> LIRs or End-Users.
>>     Removing the minimum allocation size as this may evolve over time
>> during the exhaustion period.
>>
>>
>>
>> *3) Proposal *
>> 3.1 The policy proposal changes clause/article 3.5.1 of the current IPv4
>> Soft Landing Policy to:
>> 3.5.1 EXHAUSTION PHASE 1During this phase,allocation/assignment of
>> address space will continue as in the Current phase with no explicit
>> minimum but the maximum will change from /10 to /15.
>>
>> Allocations and assignments will be made from the Final /8 or from any
>> other IPv4 address space available to AFRINIC, until no more than a /11 of
>> non-reserved space is available in the Final /8.At this point, exhaustion
>> phase 2 will begin.
>>
>> For the avoidance of doubt all applications that will be in process at
>> this point will be evaluated as per the new policy.
>>
>>
>> 3.2 This policy proposal changes Clauses/Articles 3.6, 3.8 and 3.9 of the
>> current IPv4 Soft Landing Policy to:
>> 3.6 If any LIR or End User requests IPv4 address space during Exhaustion:
>> There is no explicit limit on the number of times an organization may
>> request additional IPv4 address space during Exhaustion Phase 1. During
>> exhaustion Phase 2, new LIRs or End-Users can receive only one
>> allocation/assignment from the new LIRs or End-Users reserved pool.
>>
>>
>> 3.8 Allocation CriteriaIn order to receive IPv4 allocations or
>> assignments during the Exhaustion Phase, the LIR or
>> End User must meet IPv4 allocation or assignment policy requirements and
>> must have used at
>> least 90% of all previous allocations or assignments (including those
>> made during both the Current Phase and the Exhaustion Phase).
>>
>> In the case of new LIRs or End Users with no previous allocations or
>> assignments, this
>> requirement does not apply to their first allocation or assignment
>> request.
>>
>> LIRs and End users requesting IPv4 space must have IPv6 resources from
>> AFRINIC (or request IPv6 concurrently with their IPv4 request), or from
>> their upstream providers.
>>
>> AFRINIC resources are for the AFRINIC service region and any use outside
>> the region should be solely in support of connectivity back to the AFRINIC
>> region
>>
>>
>> 3.9 IPv4 Address Space for [Internet Exchange Points (IXPs)], critical
>> Internet infrastructure, new LIRs or End-Users and unforeseen circumstances
>>
>> During exhaustion phase 2, allocations/assignments to IXPs, Critical
>> Internet infrastructure and new LIRs and End-Users will be as follows:
>>
>>
>> 3.9.1 Assignments to critical infrastructure
>>
>> A /16 from the final /11 will be held in reserve for exclusive use by
>> critical Internet infrastructure. On application for IPv4 resources, a
>> critical Internet Infrastructure operator may receive one number resource
>> (maximum /22).
>>
>> Critical infrastructure are ICANN-sanctioned DNS root server operators,
>> IXPs, TLD (Top Level Domain) operators, IANA and RIRs.
>>
>>     On application for IPv4 resources, an Internet Exchange Point (IXP)
>> will receive one number resource (maximum /23) according to the following:
>>     This space will be used to run an Internet Exchange Point peering
>> LAN; other uses are forbidden.
>>     New Internet Exchange points will be assigned a maximum of /24.
>> Internet exchange points may return this assignment (or existing PI used as
>> in the IXP peering LAN) should they run out of space and receive a larger
>> (a maximum of /23 if utilization requires) assignment.
>>     IP space returned by Internet Exchange Points will be added to the
>> reserved pool maintained for use by Internet Exchange Points.
>>
>>
>> 3.9.2 Allocations/Assignments to new LIRs or End-Users
>>
>> A /14 from the final /11 will be held in reserve for exclusive use by new
>> LIRs or End-Users with no prior IPv4 address space from AFRINIC.  On
>> application for IPv4 resources, a new LIR or End-User may receive one
>> number resource (maximum /22).
>>
>>
>> 3.9.3 Reserve for unforeseen situations
>>
>> A /13 IPv4 address block will be in reserved out of the Final /8. This
>> /13 IPv4 address block shall be preserved by AFRINIC for some future uses,
>> as yet unforeseen. The Internet is innovative and we cannot predict with
>> certainty what might happen. Therefore, it is prudent to keep this block in
>> reserve, just in case some future requirement creates a demand for IPv4
>> addresses.
>>
>> When AFRINIC, can no longer meet any more requests for address space
>> (from the Final /8 or from any other available address space), AFRINIC in
>> consultation with the community via the Policy Discussion Mailing list and
>> considering the demand and other factors at the time will replenish the
>> exhaustion pool with whatever address space (or part thereof) that may be
>> available to AFRINIC at the time, in a manner that is in the best interests
>> of the community.
>>
>>
>>
>> * 4.0) Revision History *
>> 4th February 2016 AFPUB-2016-V4-001-DRAFT01 (Version 1.0) Posted to the
>> rpd mailing list
>>
>> * 5.0) References*
>>
>> Global Policy for the Allocation of the remaining IPv4 address pool:
>> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/policies/135-afpub-2009-v4-001
>>
>>
>>
>> * 6.0) Frequently Asked Questions *
>> Please click here
>> <https://afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development/policy-proposals/1611-soft-landing-bis-policy-faq>
>> to read through some important frequently asked questions behind
>> understanding the content in this proposal.
>>
>> Best Regards
>> Relevant Url:
>> 1. Policy Development process:
>> <http://afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development>
>> http://afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Sami Salih & Seun Ojedeji
>> PDWG Co-Chairs
>>
>> Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
>
> DISCLAIMER ------------------ NOTE: This e-mail message is subject to the
> University of Ghana email disclaimer see
> http://www.ug.edu.gh/ugemaildisclaimer for disclaimer.
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing listRPD at afrinic.nethttps://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
>

-- 
*Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA*
*Skype: sergekbk*
*Cell: +243814443160*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20160223/b699bcf6/attachment-0001.html>