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

[rpd] Appeal against softlanding-bis declaration of consensus

John Ngwoke john.ngwoke at
Tue Jan 9 11:25:48 UTC 2018

Hi Fiona,

Thanks for your opinion. My personal opinion against some of points you
raised below;

On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 9:34 AM, Fiona Asonga <tespok at> wrote:

> Hallo All
> It would be good if the authors can respond to Frank's query below. Their
> answer will significantly help bring clarity to the issue they are trying
> to resolve.

I agree with you for the benefit of clarity especially for those who do not
have full understanding of the purpose and aim of this proposal.

> If it is an issue of denying entities that can justify for additional
> resource the ability to access the resource with a time cap then there is
> reason for concern from anyone who has potential of absorbing and
> justifying for additional resource.

IMHO I see this proposal as one will challenge the organizations into the
deployment to IPv6 around Africa.

The Bis proposal as a results puts AFRINIC in a precarious legal position
> in so far as AFRINIC's mandate of allocating resources is concerned. When
> we put AFRINIC in that position we are also giving up our community right
> to develop our allocation policies and are giving that power to legal
> systems to ensure fairness of our policy. While we should encourage IPV6
> deployment we should facilitate for everyone who requires IPV4 resources to
> get them whether they are big or small. Remember the so called big LIR tend
> to operate in more than one country and may need more IPV4 for the less
> developed regions of this continent and these are many.

I know big organization like MTN with branches in Nigeria, Ghana, South
Africa, Uganda, Sudan, etc are seen as different entities in each of the
country they are operating, and if this is the case, there should be no
fear of limiting them as operate in more than one country.

> IMHO I propose we retain the current active policy already in operation
> that is more balanced and not proceed with BIS proposal.
> Kind regards
> Fiona Asonga
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Frank Habicht" <geier at>
> To: rpd at
> Sent: Friday, January 5, 2018 8:35:15 AM
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Appeal against softlanding-bis declaration   of
> consensus
> Hi,
> On 1/4/2018 6:20 PM, Noah 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.
> "any organization (regardless of its size) can be allocated /18 within a
> 24 month period during exhaustion phase 1 and /22 during exhaustion phase."
> this is already the case now.
> even better. if they (any organisation) justify, they can get even more.
> You point out positive things about the new policy (proposed), but these
> are already in place in the currently active policy.
> So how is it an improvement?
> Thanks,
> Frank
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at


*John C. Ngwoke (JP)*Head, Network section

*University of Nigeria*Nsukka 410001
*web: <>*
*Mobile: +2348035723901, +23407017059403*
*Skype:  john.ngwoke*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list