Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Appeal against softlanding-bis declaration of consensus
Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com
Thu Jan 11 06:47:21 UTC 2018
Let me get this straight – if I am reading you right:
If an organisation can return for space beyond the first /18 you *DO NOT* support this policy?
If they can’t – you do?
So – this is now real interesting – because on one hand – we have an interpretation from the authors that says – people can come back – in which case – I see this policy losing what support it has
On the other hand – we have an interpretation based on the crystal clear English in the document that says you can’t come back inside the 24 month period – in which case the authors, by the very fact that they have a totally different interpretation – join those of us who strongly oppose this policy in opposing it themselves.
How interesting – this makes for great consensus (NOT)
From: Jackson Muthili [mailto:jacksonmuthi at gmail.com]
Sent: 11 January 2018 09:20
To: John Hay <jhay at meraka.csir.co.za>
Cc: pdwg-appeal at afrinic.net; rpd >> AfriNIC Resource Policy <rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [rpd] Appeal against softlanding-bis declaration of consensus
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 8:34 AM, John Hay <jhay at meraka.csir.co.za<mailto:jhay at meraka.csir.co.za>> wrote:
On 11 January 2018 at 06:58, Jackson Muthili <jacksonmuthi at gmail.com<mailto:jacksonmuthi at gmail.com>> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 8:52 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com<mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
> Still nobody has actually addressed the substance of our arguments against
> the proposal. Do you have any answer to the issue of unfairness raised
> repeatedly with regard to the way in which a 24 month waiting period does
> not protect those in line, but those not yet in line at the expense of
> providers which need more than a /18 for continued growth? Do you have any
> response to the merits of my demonstration that it doesn’t even have to be a
> particularly large provider or a large deployment in order to require more
> than a /18 every 2 years?
Those not yet in line are the largest chunk in Africa not in America - the community you operate and live in. If you want the tiny few in line to gobble up everything, I must remind you again that AfriNIC resource distribution environment is not a capitalist approach where its an open shop for who has the money to come buy, deplete and go make a killing at the detriment of the upcoming and majority existing others that will happily be protected in that 24 month window. The tiny few will have complaints. The mostly others on the continent will be protected. This situation now is no longer a free market but a period of responsible custody of a scarce public resource. (The resource is not for a wealthy few but : for the public).
You may think different but this does not make the current situation of scarcity against a largely unconnected community go away. Think fair distribution not capitalism and open/free market.
A scarce public resource cannot be carelessly doled out irresponsibly for monetary gains of a privileged few. Sorry.
So if you want to connect more than a /18 of African users to the internet in a 2 year period, you are a privileged few, a depleter, making a killing, and it is to the detriment of .... those that you connected? ... Or those that have not been connected yet?
You are veering out of context on purpose it appears.
The current remaining IPv4 addresses can even be used by one or two companies to serve millions of their customers in less than a year and they will be depleted. In any configuration of distribution, they are simply not enough. Period.
Those bigger organisations do not take the IP address space out of Africa. They also do not leave it unused. They would not be able to request more if they left it unused. They want to use it to connect African people to the internet. Surely that is not against Africa or its people?
Those very few but bigger organizations are not the only ones with the noble albeit profit-making intent of connecting those African people.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD