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

[rpd] Appeal against softlanding-bis declaration of consensus

Owen DeLong owen at
Thu Jan 4 19:10:43 UTC 2018

> On Jan 4, 2018, at 07:20 , Noah <noah at> wrote:
> On 4 Jan 2018 17:02, "Ornella GANKPA" <honest1989 at <mailto:honest1989 at>> wrote:
> It is explicitely said in the policy that any organization (regardless of its size) can be allocated /18 within a 24
> month period during exhaustion phase 1 and /22 during exhaustion phase.
> +1 
> This is what I have been trying to point out to the opposers who have refused to acknowledge this FACTS in the draft policy which FACTS comply with Section 3.4(i) of the AFRINIC bylaws.

We have acknowledged this fact. The 24 month limit is what makes this unfair. If you want to protect the queue and establish fairness, fine… Make it so that once you get your /18 or /22, you have to utilize that and come back and get in back of the line again. However, when you add a 24 month delay to getting back in line, you’re no longer protecting the queue and no longer creating fair distribution, you’re favoring small providers and punishing success as has been shown repeatedly.

It’s not that the opponents haven’t heard what you have been pointing out or refused to acknowledge these facts. It’s that you have refused to follow these facts through to their logical conclusion and you have refused to listen to the opponents response to this repeated statement.

> 2. Anyone can always get more allocation as long as they justify 90%
> utilization. I fail to see how it prevents growth for anyone. However it
> does ensure good management of our ressources
> Well said Ornela... because the opposers have always thrown around the narrative that the policy is restrictive yet the policy states clearly that justification of 90% utilization warranties additional allocation.

Not true… Let’s look at this hypothetical phase 1 scenario under the proposed policy:

1.	Policy implemented March 1, 2018
2.	ISP A comes in on March 2, 2018 with a valid need for a /14 and is issued a /18.
3.	ISP A deploys the /18 to customers and is 95% utilized on April 5, 2018.
4.	ISP A returns to AfriNIC on April 10, 2018 still needing most of a 15/16ths of a /14,
	AfriNIC has nobody ahead of this request in the queue and still has 0.45 /8s in the
	free pool.
5.	ISP A is asked to wait 23 more months before getting another /18.

Please compare this scenario to Ornela’s statement 2 above. I believe that 5 is a clear case
of proving that statement false.

> The policy doesn't punish success. In any case, it encourages carefully
> planned growth

We can agree to disagree about this. I’d say that the scenario above is a case of carefully
planned growth and success being punished.


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

More information about the RPD mailing list