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

[rpd] New Proposal - "Internet Number Resources Audit by AFRINIC (AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT01)"

Benjamin Eshun beshun at
Mon May 23 18:30:15 UTC 2016

 Comments are in line....

On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Nishal Goburdhan <nishal at
> wrote:

ok, so using that logic, can is there another RIR that has successfully
> shown, how this can be done?  the case across the world, seems to be that
> this is too much effort, for too little gain.  so, honestly, unless there’s
> some magician that can show how/why this is likely to be different in
> africa, it’s reasonable to assume that this is also going to be the case
> here.
> as a paying member, i want afrinic - using its limited resources - to
> prioritise that, which will take us forward.
show me a RIR that has equal number of resources in reserve as AFRINIC and
I will show you how.  The fact is that we are in uncharted waters and
prudent measures have to be taken to ensure fair and equitable access to
these finite resources. The current situation was not foreseen that why we
have this list to propose policies for the way forward.  I am also a paying
member and I want to be very sure that the next time I request for
additional resources, the request will be reevaluated based on what I need
and what is truly available and not some sort of artificial scarcity.

> but then, i don’t know any magicians.

Well I don't know of any either, but I know of something better, which the
Community, Board and staff of the organization.  It is up to the community
to propose policies and it is the job of the Board and staff to implement
the policies in a transparent and neutral matter. We need to find solutions
to solve own problems as stated in Section 2 of the policy.

> the general “please use these resources in africa” is already implicitly
> defined in afrinic’s allocation policies;  ask any hostmaster.
> ie. the spirit of:  “AfriNIC allocates resources … for use … in Africa”
> etc.
> so, using the analogy above, the “speed-limit” that’s being requested, is
> already set.
> what’s missing is, the “technology” that’s referenced above.  and this
> “technology” hasn’t actually been explained in the policy, so, there’s not
> really much to go on.

For the avoidance of doubt we are talking about this policy ie "Internet
Number Resources Audit by AFRINIC (AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT01)" and not as
to either the resources should be used in or out of the AFRINIC region.  We
can start another thread on debating the merits and demerits of stating
explicitly where the resources should be used, but now let's not digress.

So in my analogy, "speed limit" is the policy itself "to avoiding
stockpiling in accordance with RFC7020, IPv4 Allocation Policy
(AFPUB-2005-V4- 001)...." and the "technology" in this case is the stated
in section 3 of the policy which is how the audits will be conducted. So in
essence, once I know AFRINIC as the power and the mandate to explicitly
conduct audits I would be careful about the requests I make, and that in
itself is a fair, foolproof, easy and inexpensive deterrent.

And for others that may not be deterred by this, section 3.3 a) to c) of
the proposal will address it.

so, go ahead;  try to find a fair, foolproof, easy, and inexpensive way to
> police this.  if/when we get to this stage when this looks like it will be
> completed, it’ll likely be worthless at that time because, by then, it
> won’t be just the Cool Kids that will be running IPv6, everyone will be
> doing it.
Just suggested one above and I agreed we should go ahead and let posterity
be the judge as to who will be the Cool Kids on the block running both v4
and/or v6 in a efficient and appropriate use of resources.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list