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

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

Nishal Goburdhan nishal at
Mon Aug 29 09:03:09 UTC 2016

On 28 Aug 2016, at 20:33, sm+afrinic at wrote:

> Hi Nishal,

hi sm,

> At 03:15 28-08-2016, Nishal Goburdhan wrote:
>> worthless and unreliable are not the same.
> Ok.
>> while i lack a means to measure its value/worth to (either of) you, 
>> have you found inconsistencies in the data presented?   i'd expect 
>> that this is taken directly from afrinic's allocations and 
>> assignments, so i'd be worried if you could show that this was 
>> unreliable information.
> A few months ago, I did some statistics for a country.  As the figures 
> did not match the local environment I did a manual verification of the 
> data.  Afterwards, I noticed that some researchers encountered a 
> similar issue.

.. and when you reported this to afrinic, they said … ?

<tl;dr>  my concern is the accuracy;  it’s ok to make mistakes.
it’s not ok to repeat these.
it’s not ok to ignore them.

>> i'm not certain how one mauritian operator's peering policy is 
>> related to either 6spots, ipv6, or RPD  :-)   but as someone who 
>> follows peering trends in the region, the article was mildly 
>> interesting, thank you.
> Discussions about what is claimed to be "critical infrastructure" are 
> related to RPD as that is mentioned in existing policy proposals about 
> IPv4.

fair enough;  but the article didn’t discuss the critical 
infrastructure component (the otherwise functioning MIXP, in this case) 
but rather the results of one ISP’s peering policy, eh?


More information about the RPD mailing list