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

[rpd] Statistics on IPV4 allocation in Africa as of 2016

Honest Ornella GANKPA honest1989 at
Thu Jun 16 09:08:50 UTC 2016

Hello Owen,

I do not think the intention is to try and delay anything. My english might
be too poor to partake into analogies so I will be plain and simple: It
will be a big challenge for many start-ups and new LIRs in Africa to deploy
v6 only networks.

For most of them, they will start out by building dual stack environments
and how will they be able to do that without v4 ressources. Again we cannot
use the same reasonning as America and Europe. Those are not the same
context and even in those cases, there are still heavy transfers and
demands of v4 and not so fast uptake of v6

IPv4 might not be sustainable but it is still deeply critical for a smooth
transition to v6. And forcing burgeoning LIRs into that territory without
that safety net would hugely cripple them

2016-06-15 19:54 GMT+01:00 Owen DeLong <owen at>:

> On Jun 15, 2016, at 06:07 , Honest Ornella GANKPA <honest1989 at>
> wrote:
> Hello Andrew,
> *So long as its being used to provide internet to the people in Africa,
> wherever they are, whoever they are, and not flowing off the continent, it
> doesn’t matter to me.*
> I agree with you 100% on this. I believe this is actually what we all want
> in the end
> *We are all one continent, we are all African, and I stand by the view
> that fair use = let those who need it and can use it, have it.*
> I agree with you on this as well. In my opinion, none of the (soft
> landing) policies were preventing people from getting ressources. Of course
> if one needs it and can justify the needs, they can get it.
> However we must keep in my mind that this is the last /8 we are talking
> about. its depletion is inevitable but how are we going to go about it?
> This is where we disagree. I do not believe we should rush into depletion.
> Even if the process is slower in our region, it is not that bad. It just
> means we have more time to prepare (policies and infrastructures) for what
> comes next.
> I’m sorry, Honest, but I couldn’t disagree more.
> The continued IPv4 free pool in Africa and the perception that delaying
> what comes next by slowing down the uptake of IPv4 addresses in Africa is a
> complete fallacy.
> Let me attempt to provide a real world parallel. I apologize for the
> graphic nature, but it’s the closest I could come in analogy.
> Let’s say you are stranded in a remote area with a 7 day supply of food.
> If you go to the minimum consumption that will still sustain your health,
> you can stretch it to 10 days. If you go to the minimum that will keep you
> alive, it will last 21 days.
> You might think that the intuitively obvious answer is to go to the
> minimum that will keep you alive. However, consensus among survival experts
> is that this is a very wrong answer. See, while you will still be alive
> after that 21 days, you’ll be extremely weak, very hungry, and your body
> will have begun feeding off of itself. Your health will be severely
> compromised and your actual chances of survival overall are greatly
> reduced. Instead, it is better to go for the 10 day consumption rate and
> try like hell to get rescued, find food, or reach civilization during those
> 10 days.
> Similarly, the only way to make the free pool last longer in Africa is by
> starving those providers who have needs now in favor of holding the
> resources for them or other providers who might need them later.
> Instead, the best thing is for all of us to recognize that IPv4 has become
> unsustainable and stop depending on its continued availability.
> Owen

Honest Ornella GANKPA
Network engineer

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

More information about the RPD mailing list