[rpd] Soft Landing Review

Thu Dec 8 09:31:01 UTC 2016

Yes. You have the essence. Anyone with less than a /21 can get space in
Phase 3 - but only to bring their space up to a /21 - a /22 at a time.

I'm suggesting that space from Phase 2 and 3 can not be transferred
(sold) or otherwise disposed-of/acquired by mergers or acquisitions. The
addresses would have to go back to AFRINIC. The only exception would be
a change of ownership or organisational name. I guess logically, if two
players both with a /21 were to merge into a single entity, they would
have to return a single /21 of space - not both /21's.

This (punitive?) action is based on my belief that even a good sized ISP
should be able to run just fine on something like a /21.
End users should run IPv6 as would all infrastructure. Exceptions  could
be some NAT64 systems, Nameservers, outward facing mail systems, and
other outward facing systems such as Web Servers and boundary routers.
Essentially, IPv4 would be used close to the edge.
The underlying purpose is to deny an entity creating multiple
organisations and then merging the addresses into that entity - as we
see for example in RIPE today.
I run a Web Server which manages about 1000 web sites and it uses 4 IPv4
addresses - and that's for convenience. All the customer web sites (SSL
and not) are on the same single IP address. My Hosted customers who also
run multiple web sites usually get by on two IPv4 addresses as well.

Please note - these are ideas at this moment. I'm looking for some
guidance and consensus from people that have first-hand experience.

On 08/12/2016 08:53, Dewole Ajao wrote:
> Thanks for the email, Mark. If I may quickly summarize your email, you
> are recommending:
> 
> 1. Maintain phase 1 and phase 2 of soft-landing status as presently defined
> 
> 2. Add a phase 3 in which the strategic reserve /12 (that was hitherto
> for unforeseen use) is unlocked and used strictly for organizations that
> have less than /22 at the time of application. Allocation/assignment
> size for each application will be limited to /22. Qualified
> organizations can apply up to twice for (/22) allocations/assignments in
> phase 3 (as long as their final total is not greater than /21).
> 
> 3. Apply non-mobility to any resources received in phases 2 and 3. I
> guess this deals with the problem of people registering new
> organizations just to access resources and then selling the resources in
> a transfer. Such new companies could still be sold lock, stock and
> barrel though?
> 
> Dear PDWG, please share your thoughts on the discussion list so we can
> fine-tune.
> 
> Regards,
> Dewole.
> 
> On 07/12/2016 11:52, Mark Elkins wrote:
>> On 07/12/2016 02:49, sm+afrinic at elandsys.com wrote:
>>
>>> I have simplified the following; I have also not considered some
>>> of the input to the discussions:  There has been input from two
>>> "internet service providers" only.  Given that there is only 1.38
>>> IPv4 /8 available, can a decision which will affect the entire.
>>> service region be taken?
>> I've been looking at the current Soft Landing proposal - the one that is
>> in existence and the one that I contributed a little bit to (thanks
>> Douglas!).
>>
>> Essentially:-
>>
>> Phase 1:
>> When we hit the last /8, Phase 1 reduces the max size of an
>> allocation/assignment from /10 to /13. It also carves off a /12 for
>> unforeseen use. This continues until we have a /11 left.
>> This will allow for 7 x /11's and a /12 - if people choose the largest
>> possible sizes. This will still take a while to go through.
>>
>> Phase 2:
>> Allow people to get up to a /22. People can come back multiple times.
>> There are 2048 of these /22 blocks available. This would take a while to
>> burn through, simply because the process is a bit slow.
>>
>> Then we are finished.
>>
>>                       -------------
>>
>> However - the Unforeseen /12 could still be used.
>> We already have reserves for IXP's and Critical infrastructure.
>>
>> I'd like to see a revision that there is then a Phase 3:
>>
>> That the /12 can be given out in /22's (there are 1024 of these) but
>> only to people with a total of less than a /21 (including what they ask
>> for). ie - New people could come back once. This I believe will last
>> multiple years.
>>
>> I don't believe we need any further reserves.
>>
>> We only need to last another two or three years.
>>
>> Lastly - any addresses from Phase 2 or 3 can never be transferred, (M&A
>> included) and must be returned to AFRINIC for re-deployment.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: 3854 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20161208/a3fb9a70/attachment-0001.p7s>