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

Tue Jun 21 08:24:54 UTC 2016

Ouch Andrew...

One though I had when reading Kris's email,

AFRINIC currently gives a 50% fee reduction to Universities. They could
probably link that discount to an expectation - that the University
actually has IPv6, routes it and has contactable services dual-stacked
with IPv4 address space belonging to the same University - otherwise no
discount. Even if their country has poor IPv6 connectivity, a tunnel to
HE could sort that out quite simply.

No reason for local IXP's not to have IPv6 as well and if you are a
University and there is no exchange point - create one - be a Leader.

AFRINIC also has some sort of IPv6 tunnel broker.
Maybe Liquid could do the same?

Universities thus whilst not forced to run IPv6 (dual-stack), would find
it financially prudent to do so. Are they not usually considered amongst
the Leaders of development in a country?

Like I said, just a thought.

Mark @ Posix - who has been dual-sacked since February 2007, despite
Telkom SA still not commercially providing me native IPv6 access.

On 21/06/2016 08:45, Andrew Alston wrote:
> Ok, as another (only slightly tongue in cheek idea) let's increase the
> fees for v4 by 100 percentage and if someone can concretely demonstrate
> v6 deployment (beyond just the core and a website, actually to the end
> users!) they get a 50 percent discount.
> 
> Yes I know fees are not the domain of the RPD list, but the idea may get
> people thinking along further tracks, because effectively this properly
> incentives v6 deployment rather than just forcing people to have space
> they may never use as is the case in the proposals I have seen up till now.
> 
> Andrew
> 
> Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 8:09 AM +0300, "Kris Seeburn"
> <seeburn.k at gmail.com <mailto:seeburn.k at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> Reply inline
> 
>> On Jun 21, 2016, at 11:43 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com
>> <mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 20, 2016, at 18:31 , Kris Seeburn <seeburn.k at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:seeburn.k at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> 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? 
>>>       o 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?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Please NOOOOOOOOO NOOOO NOOO NOOO NOOO NOOO…
>>
>> Please do not encourage this IPv4-thinking with IPv6. Every end site
>> should get a /48. More if there’s some reason for it which I find
>> somewhat unimaginable, but my imagination is admittedly limited.
>>
>> Stop scarcity-thinking and trying to conserve the wrong things in
>> IPv6. There are PLENTY of /48s in the first /3. If I’m wrong to the
>> extent that we finish off even this first /3 in 50 years, then by all
>> means, I will help you write more restrictive policies for the
>> remaining 6+ /3s.
> 
> I am in full agreement with what you say here whether it is still shared
> by all is a bit of a challenge. However much the v6 allocation being
> made for free how much is being advertised and used? I’d like to know
> that for real. The issue i also have is great loads to give away but
> there is also costs to it right? Fine give away give away for free how
> long do we sustain it. Afrinic does not have that many members as in
> ARIN or RIPE either way. So really i wish i could see some real use of
> v6. Allocating without use at the end user makes it dull for me. Then
> what is the use. If you followed the threads you would see same
> happening. Allocation and usage are two stories right now.
> 
> However, i would still want to hear the miracle coming across soon :)
> 
> 
>>
>>>       o 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.
>>>
>>
>> I admit I’m not sure I understand what exactly you are attempting to
>> propose here.
> 
> 
> What i was trying to say is we could reduce the allocation size for
> organisation who do not use v6 and still give the wider chunk to
> Academia and research and push that v6 allocated to academia who get 50%
> discount anyways should heavily promote v6 as a result. The slashes may
> need some revisiting but i’d me more tempted to give them a block that
> they would use than give it to someone who does not want it anyways.
> 
>>
>>> 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. 
>>
>> That sounds great, but can you express it in concrete actions as I’m
>> unsure how anyone goes about implementing it in policy or in actions
>> on their own networks.
> 
> Its not only about policy its also making sure Afrinic can really
> sustain itself after softlanding as the figures will go up during the
> softlanding as the other RIRs have experienced but at some point it will
> just be recurrent revenue that will be straight line for a long time and
> the need to ensure that revenue comes from the main business the need to
> reflect properly on those is also important. The community has its views
> and also to make sure the organisation sustains itself and lives or
> outlives us.
> 
>>
>>
> 
> Kris Seeburn
> seeburn.k at gmail.com <mailto:seeburn.k at gmail.com>
> 
>   *
> 
>         www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
> 

-- 
Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4230 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20160621/99f16537/attachment.p7s>