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

[Kris Seeburn]

So i just want to push another thought in this pool of ideas going around. I wanted us all to think :

One i agree that afrinic cannot and should not impose IPv6 as much as it concerns the major LIRs which to me is quite understandable at this stage and am again 50/50 on this. It is like ok giving some v6 resources away which is not being used majorly either since the concentration is still with the v4 space. Fair enough, Afrinic in the past had decided to give v6 resources for free to help in its growth. So nothing much is happening so far. So am i picking suggestions that we should not give v6 resources away for free?
The other thinking i am having is ok fine perhaps the minimal v6 allocation that comes with the v4 resources is too much anyways - perhaps a very least minimal give away should be /52 or /56 on a general approach for organisations to look at it and perhaps then come back and ask for bigger blocks that can be charged?
On a different scale as far as Academia/Research is concerned perhaps we should take a different approach with them. Since they are kind of key to research we can take it that v4 resources and v6 resources should be allocated differently and dual stacking be requested as part of allocation. People do not get me wrong here. This is the very start of teaching and research which may require further in depth thinking and these institutions as much as paying 50% in general terms should be able to nurture the future of v6 as well. I know in general Academia does not want to be touched and compared differently we need to also see the real essence of facts.

Bottomline what is important is also survival of the businesses as much as survival of Afrinic as well. Great policies great but i feel personally that everything needs to be weighted as well to ensure sustained growth in all parts of the organisations in general.

My personal take is really no imposed approach perhaps a very limited v6 allocation in general to any new comer but when they need the v6 resources come back to get them if you need them.

Academia/Research v4 and v6 allocation goes hand in hand however v6 resources may need to be dual stacked with your v4 space and should be in use at least to some extent perhaps 30-40% usage needs to happen else i find it again useless to allocate v6 again if not used. To me it means “yes we have it but hey we not using it anyways”. No imposition but want some added thinking.

I am sure this would generate some good and bad “for and against” but i need to be sure i am also thinking straight here to see how best we can use our resources properly and being used and not thrown in a just allocation box.


> On Jun 21, 2016, at 5:40 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Jun 18, 2016, at 04:26 , Danny <afahounko at gmail.com <mailto:afahounko at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello Nishal,
>> 
>> I don't support either your comment/suggestions.
>> 
>> One question: How are we going to increase use of IPv6 in our region if we do not strengthen our policies about ipv6 adoption?
>> "Don't tell me how to run my network " routhly said. I personally don't support and don't like this answer.
>> AFRINIC vision is "Be the leading force in growing the internet for Africa's sustainable development" and it is Afrinic duty to put all the necessary guidelines for the development of Internet in our region.
>> Please we should not forget Afrinic mission in our region.
>> And Afrinic has already started by trainings and capacity building.
>> We need just to strengthen it and make the IPv6 a reality in our region.
>> 
>> Regards.
>> 
> 
> Danny,
> 
> The key you are missing is “leading”… Let’s look at what that word means.
> 
> A leader shows the way. A leader is in front giving an example and encouraging others to follow that example.
> 
> If you are pushing someone, you cannot possibly be in front of them, or, you are sending them in the wrong way.
> Pushing IPv6 resources onto networks that do not want them will not get IPv6 deployed. It is not leadership. It is pushing and it will push people in the wrong direction. At best, it will accomplish nothing. At worst, it will create resentments… “What do you mean I have to pay for resources I don’t want in order to get the resources I want?”
> 
> I admit that my proposal may risk some of those resentments as well, but at least in the case of what I have proposed (and I’m not sure this is a good idea, just an idea) I put forth concrete measurable metrics for actual deployment and use of IPv6 rather than merely here, you must take and pay for these resources whether you will use them or not.
> 
> Owen
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

Kris Seeburn
seeburn.k at gmail.com
www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/>




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20160621/10ab9abd/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20160621/10ab9abd/attachment-0001.sig>