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

[rpd] FW: Opposition to the changes in the AfriNIC Soft Landing Policy

Komi Elitcha kmw.elitcha at
Tue Dec 5 01:06:18 UTC 2017


Le 4 déc. 2017 11:31, "Saul Stein" <saul at> a écrit :

Dear All,

I am seeing a large number or people who are against this policy. Far more
than the 3 (if that) that have supported it. So I really do not see how and
where the public consensus came from to pass this policy. The majority have
spoken and are continuing to do so against this policy.

…there does seem to be a planned campaign.   Quite understandable for me.
It is the claim by some of the “multitude” that the Co-chairs did not
follow process that is not quite clear to me.

This policy proposal  has been discussed since February  2016 and has
evolved a lot and address the main issues. So far there is no new major
issues raised since this campaign started and this consolidates cochairs

RFC7282  sections 6 and 7 say:

 6.  One hundred people for and five people against might not be rough

7.  Five people for and one hundred people against might still be rough

Most of us are unable to be professional meeting attenders and often can’t
afford the hours to spend away from our days jobs to follow online. Thus
mailing lists offer us the time to catch-up after hours when we have time.
Even so, again, where are all the supporters? We’re only seeing numerous
people rejecting the proposal

As to the these signed documents that Andrew is sending, as one doesn’t
need to be a member of AFRINIC to have a say in the RDP, so anyone call
really have their say. As to the process and what has been discussed, the
RPD isn’t the only mailing list and there have been a comments on local
mailing lists.

The majority of people and real jobs (paid for by an employer) and don’t
have the time to follow and read everything, but do talk to others and keep
up to date with what is going in. Not to be able to receive more than a /18
now or a /22 in phase two in a two hear period, doesn’t take a rocket
scientist to realise that it will kill any business and more importantly
inhibit growth. It is well known, giving access to the internet, increases
education, knowledge and quality of life thus reducing unemployment –all
things that we really need to resolve in Africa. Why would any thinking
person want to limit this?

We should not forget that the intent in soft-landing is transition to
IPv6.  Or is IPv4 now the future?

I heard the same folks saying IPv4 is dead/obsolete but now I am hearing we
need IPv4.

One would expect that only laggards who don’t yet have real networks to run
would be thinking of Phase 2 at this point.

The bottom line here is that this  shouldn’t have reached last call because
of the lack unaddressed objections going back at least two years. It has
been clear from the numerous objections that there is no consensus on this

Chairs, please think and hear what the community are saying and act
accordingly. This is wasting large amounts for time that could be used in
other areas!

Let’s sell the resource to members, AFRINIC can then either reduce all our
fees (to get inline with the other RIRs) from the extra revenue they are
making and we get on with v6 deployment

Sell?   I am confused.  Is it about fees now?  No longer IPv4 obsolescence
and IPv6 uptake?  Is there anything that stops forward looking network
managers like yourself from deploying v6 now?

Just my 2c..

RPD mailing list
RPD at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list