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

[rpd] Last Call for "AFPUB-2016-GEN-001-DRAFT-04 - Internet Number Resources Review by AFRINIC"

Lu Heng at
Wed Jul 12 06:56:55 UTC 2017


On 12 July 2017 at 08:12, Bill Woodcock <woody at> wrote:

> While I am not going to opine on the merits of the policy under
> discussion, I’d like to draw attention to one of the assertions made in the
> discussion:
> > On Jun 26, 2017, at 8:37 PM, Lu Heng < at> wrote:
> > This policy is in direct conflict with transfer policy, if someone wants
> to sell their address space, they surely not commit to use it with the
> original purpose, should AFRINIC instead of allowing them to transfer the
> space, but reclaim them and redistribute them for "better use"? If that is
> the case, the transfer policy will have no use because of that.
> I would just like to point out that the AfriNIC community does not exist
> to serve the financial interests of those who wish to sell addresses,
> rather than use them.
> The AfriNIC community is the community of people who need IP addresses, in
> order to route them and give people access to the Internet.  The AfriNIC
> policy process exists to serve those who wish to _use_ IP addresses, not
> those who wish to profit from them at the expense of the community.
> So, whatever your thoughts on the merits of this proposal, the fact that
> it fails to serve the interests of speculators is not an argument against
> it.

The argument in my statement makes no contribution to the model of
redistribution address space, yes, it can be so choice by the community,
allow people to sell it, or ask the registry to redistribute it.

By far, in today's reality, globe community has a consensus in this very
topic, that market works far better than central planning.

It been very interesting to see an American--where the heart of capitalism
are in support of central management and central distribution of the
resources rather than supporting market economy, the very argument
supporting planning economy in communist country was exactly the same that
expecting people will return their resource (whatever it is, food, tools,
even money) after usage voluntarily, rather let the market do its job.

By blood and millions of lives in the 20th century, human has learned a
hard lesson this way really doesn't work.

However it is irrelevant to this very topic in the table, I barely point it
out that this policy is in direct conflict of an existing policy, so, in
order for the policy document to make sense, either this policy need to
substantially modify the transfer policy, or being withdrawal.

>                                 -Bill
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at

Kind regards.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list