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

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

Mark Tinka mark.tinka at
Mon Jun 20 11:30:20 UTC 2016

On 20/Jun/16 13:11, ALAIN AINA wrote:

> Yes, that the provision we have in the policy proposal, but based on
> what we heard on this list about new comers which would only need
> IPv4*, i was trying to get a common ground  for all, so we can move on.
> [*] i am still convinced that no one shall get IPv4 from the the last
> /8 without showing IPv6 and will remain to it if we can get a rough
> consensus on it, which i think is possible.

Well, new entrants have neither, so expecting them to show IPv6
deployment (or allocation) is moot. If the policy is updated as such, it
will be good to make this distinction clear.

That said, I'm not so sure about creating a "new entrants" IPv4 pool.
>From an enforcement standpoint, I can't immediately see how this can be
tracked, which, by extension, means anyone could "create" a new entrant
business to circumnavigate the policy. But it would be nice to hear
other views. Personally, I'm still 50/50...


More information about the RPD mailing list