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

[rpd] Appeal against softlanding-bis declaration of consensus

Lee Howard lee.howard at
Sat Feb 10 17:45:56 UTC 2018

I think I understand now, but I'm going to be methodical about making sure.

The full context of Ornella Gankpa's interpretation of the proposal is:

    organization (regardless of its size) can be allocated /18 within a 24
    month period during exhaustion phase 1 and /22 during exhaustion phase
    2. Anyone can always get more allocation as long as they justify 90%
    utilization. I fail to see how it prevents growth for anyone.

You agreed that was correct, to a maximum of /22 every two years, in 
Phase 2. I know I was confused by the statement that "anyone can always 
get more," since anyone who has already gotten 1,024 addresses in Phase 
2 can not get more.

I think, after carefully reviewing the thread, that everyone agrees that 
the -bis policy means that, in Phase 2, no organization will receive 
more than 1,024 IPv4 addresses (total equivalent of /22) every 24 
months. For example, if Phase 2 begins on 1 December 2018, and an 
organization shows 90% utilization on 2 December, and justifies a /22, 
they will get a /22, and no more until 2 December 2020. Their only other 
source of IPv4 addresses would be designated transfers within the 
Afrinic region (section 5.7).

If I misunderstand, please set me right.


PS: To be thorough, the alternate interpretation is that an organization 
can get one or more allocations, *each* totalling a /22. But then what 
does the 24 month period refer to?

On 02/10/2018 11:01 AM, ALAIN AINA wrote:
> Hello,
> The policy proposal’s text is authentic and unequivocal. Sections 5.4.5 and 5.4.6:
> ======
> 5.4.5 Allocation Criteria
> In order to receive IPv4 allocations or assignments during the Exhaustion Phase, the LIR or End User must meet IPv4 allocations or assignment policy requirements (by demonstrating and justifying the need for requested space) and must demonstrate to have efficiently used at least 90% of all previous allocations or assignments (including those made during both the Pre-Exhaustion and the Exhaustion Phase).
> In the case of new LIRs or End Users (those that have no previous allocations or assignments prior to the Exhaustion phase), this requirement does not apply to their first allocation or assignment request.
> AFRINIC resources are for the AFRINIC service region and any use outside the region should be solely in support of connectivity back to the AFRINIC region
> 5.4.6 Allowable Limits
> Within any 24-month period during Exhaustion Phase 1, an organization may receive one or more allocations/assignments totalling the equivalent of a /18.
> Within any 24-month period during Exhaustion Phase 2, an organization may receive one or more allocations/assignments totalling the equivalent of a /22.
> =======
> Thanks
> —Alain
>> On 7 Feb 2018, at 19:15, Nishal Goburdhan <nishal at> wrote:
>> /bump.
>> On 23 Jan 2018, at 13:45, Nishal Goburdhan wrote:
>>> On 11 Jan 2018, at 14:33, Nishal Goburdhan wrote:
>>>> On 10 Jan 2018, at 21:38, ALAIN AINA wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>> hi alain,
>>>> hny :-)
>>>>>> On 5 Jan 2018, at 10:05, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4 Jan 2018, at 15:56, Ornella GANKPA <honest1989 at> wrote:
>>>>>>> Anyone can always get more allocation as long as they justify 90%
>>>>>>> utilization.
>>>>>> That is accurate for the existing soft landing policy <>, but it is not accurate for the soft landing bis proposal <> (which recently ended last call and was sent to the Board for ratification, and which is the subject of an appeal).
>>>>>> Under the soft landing bis proposal, no organisation will be able to receive more than a /18 of IPv4 space every 24 months during “Exhaustion Phase 1”, or a /22 every 24 months during “Exhaustion Phase 2”, even if they can demonstrate 90% utilisation.
>>>>> Ornella presentation of the SL-BIS  is accurate.
>>>>> SL-BIS  set not limit on the number of requests a member can make until they reach the maximum allowable size during each exhaustion phase.
>>>> yes, but it does specify an upper limit on the total space that can be requested.   ie.  “totalling the equivalent of a /x “.  i admit that when i read this, i read it as an organisation not being able to get more than a /x within a period.  and it seems clear to me, that this is how it’s understood by many other people too.
>>>> so, to eschew obfuscation, could you clarify that please.
>>>> if you are saying that, an organisation can go back, and get more than that, then, this changes things quite a bit.  for a start, if i was able to get more than a /18, in a 2yr year period, then why have the 2yr period at all?
>>>> —n.
>>>> ps. i’m not stating the obvious; that i have satisfied the hostmaster’s concerns that my usage is legitimate.
>>> hi,
>>> just in case this was lost in the back-to-work rush ..
>>> —n.
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at

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

More information about the RPD mailing list