[rpd] Inbound Policy

[sm+afrinic at elandsys.com]

Hi David,
At 04:45 09-12-2016, fransossen at yahoo.com wrote:
>My comments where in context of future IPv4 transfers, apologies if unclear.
>That's all.
>Of course anyone can still get what they need as long as they are in 
>good standing.

Thank you for clarifying that.

>I could be wrong and for some reason the AFRINIC transfer market 
>prices will be lower than in the rest of the world, but I don't see 
>that happening.

Ok.

>Without any possibility to offer any external competition,the prices 
>within the region will be as high as the seller wants, given the 
>amount of members in the region the offer will be scarce leading to 
>high prices without any possibility to source outside of the region 
>and import into AFRINIC.

Please see below.

>The more restrictive the transfers policy is, the higher the costs 
>will be, inbound transfer would had helped a bit and at the least it 
>would give an option or alternative for sourcing IPv4 address.

I gathered that pricing would depend on the restrictions in a policy 
about transfers.

>I support transfers as in "they will happen, let's regulate them or 
>we will get a mess", other than that I am not a fan of them, 
>but  all transfers will come at a financial costs, they are not "new 
>allocations" issued from the AFRINIC pool.
>Any company sourcing transfers will do so at a large cost.

There are also legal issues to consider.

>Putting restrictions on transfer from out of region is not going to 
>help new LIRs and is certainly not going to help any already 
>existing organisation either other than sellers/brokers, by the time 
>transfers are happening, the IPv4 pool of the AFRINIC will be 
>depleted, and no "policing" can replenish that pool to any level 
>that would have a noticeable impact for the whole community.
>
>IPv4 policies are there to ensure the fair distribution and 
>utilisation of address space from the free pool, once that pool is 
>depleted, a lot of these policies will be obsolete and even 
>detrimental to the further development of IPv4 networks, restricting 
>inbound transfer but allowing intra transfer is detrimental to 
>almost everyone but the sellers/brokers.

The existing policy states that IPv4 distribution is according to 
actual need and on the basis of immediate use.  It seems more like a 
matter of when distribution cannot be done on that basis instead of 
being about when the free pool will be depleted.  There are also 
legal considerations.  I agree that there are limits to "policing" or 
enforcement.  I am not sure about this; the "intra transfer" might be 
perceived as a way to find out how transfer works instead of a 
proposal which is advantageous to the buyers.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy