[rpd] Statistics on IPV4 allocation in Africa as of 2016[WARNING: ATTACHMENT UNSCANNED]

[ALAIN AINA]

> On Jun 29, 2016, at 4:17 PM, Hytham El-Nakhal <hytham at tra.gov.eg> wrote:
> 
> Well, I've a personal experience about the role of regulator in pushing IPv6 ..
> 
> 

Thanks for sharing...

> 
> In 2008 I, as a leader for IPv6 Taskforce in Egypt, proposed a guideline for imported communication equipment to be compliant with IPv6 in addition to IPv4.. My intentions at this time were to pave the road for IPv6 deployment and to slow-down importing of obsolete "v4 only" equipment.

The intention was good, but at that time, it was difficult to sell IPv6. I remember it was the time we move from “Why deploy IPv6” to “What is the cost of not deploying IPv6” as we were not getting the message through.
> 
> This guideline tabled to "Type Approval" department, it's a department existing in each Regulator to approve that the imported communications equipment are compliant with international standards and local regulations, The reply from Type Approval department was: we can't enforce this rule because we can't for example prevent or limit the importing of 2G mobile hand-sets while we have all mobile networks are upgraded to 3G…

I can understand this from the 2008 context. Also, there was a significant cost in enforcing that since not so many products were IPv6 ready/capable. But things have changed since 2011….

When we moved from dialup to broadband, we never prevented or limit the import of analog modems. Moving from IPv4 to IPv6 has some particularities which imply such actions by regulation or incentive. We are making changes at the transport layer, which  is critical for the future of the Internet, but has no direct effect on "end-user experience" and no direct revenues to the providers.

> 
> That's to say as far as we have v4 and dual-stack in our networks, we can't have a rule or regulation to enforce IPv6 compliant equipment..

Things have changed and many are now seeing  the issues with IPv6 compared to other changes we went through. Also large number of products are now IPv6 ready/capable. Regulations or incentives on limiting import of IP4-only or levying more duties on them are on recommendations list in 2016. 

> 
> But, Fortunately I can pass an article to be added in government tenders for communications equipment (such as switches, routers, firewalls,...etc.) to be compliant with IPv6. (i.e. support IPv6)

Governments showing the example and leading the migration has always been part of the strategy…

—Alain

> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Haitham
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 2:21 PM
> To: Mark Tinka
> Cc: rpd List
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Statistics on IPV4 allocation in Africa as of 2016[WARNING: ATTACHMENT UNSCANNED]
> 
> 
> On 19 Jun 2016, at 10:06, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu<mailto:mark.tinka at seacom.mu>> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 18/Jun/16 16:33, Willy MANGA wrote:
> 
> This is where I think conscious customers, end-users and government
> regulators can enter the game and push pressure to operators.
> 
> The regulators can enforce the rule of buying IPv6 compliant equipment
> for instance ...
> 
> I would support regulator involvement in a country's IPv6 adoption. I've
> seen this work fairly well in Malaysia, where the MCMC (their regulator)
> took on a lot of initiative to support IPv6 adoption. However, they did
> in a way that did not trample on the operators' business, but rather,
> encouraged them to deploy. While Malaysia have come a long way re: IPv6
> deployment, a lot more still needs to be done.
> 
> My point is it's not easy, and Africa being more than just one country,
> co-ordinating this is going to be difficult across the board, meaning
> that any objectives that hinge on this could be non-uniform.
> 
> It is not easy but there are regional associations of telecom regulators we could work with to make it less painful.  The AFGWG and IPv6 councils in many African countries who would also benefit from a collaborative approach.  The regional RENs are exploring ways in which NRENs and their communities play a role in this and support in-country.  Ideas welcome.
> 
> -Omo
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd