Search RPD Archives
[rpd] inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR policy proposals
john at sanren.ac.za
Sun Jul 14 18:33:00 UTC 2019
Even with Jordi's proposals the two RIRs will be part the transfer.
The one to release the resources and the other one to accept it. Both
of them must be satisfied that all policy conditions were met,
otherwise the transfer will not happen.
Leasing is an interesting idea, but I think it will lower the value,
so the seller gets less money and have less incentive to free up the
address space and then sit with a useless asset in a few years. Are
you going to lease in one direction (Afrinic -> elsewhere) and buy in
the other direction (elsewhere -> Afrinic)? Remember IPv4 addresses
have temporary value.
I'm not sure you will be able to convince the other RIRs to accept new
policies with your conditions. They already approved transfer policies
with less restrictions, why would they want to go through a whole
process again to restrict it? I don't think ARIN mind that the
majority of transfers will be away from them. I think all of them knew
that even before they ratified their transfer policy.
Even if we adopt a bi-directional transfer policy with none of the
extra restrictions Jordi mentioned, I think relatively little address
space will be transferred out of Afrinic. The majority will come in
because the ISPs that really want to connect more and more people in
Africa, will need it.
The legacy IPv4 space in Afrinic is relatively small compared to what
is in ARIN. The allocation was also not really the same. In the USA
the organisations that started with what became the internet (long
before ARIN) were just allocated a /8, with no consideration about
usage. When organisations in Africa started to request IPv4 space, in
the early 1990's, they were mostly allocated a /16 or smaller block.
Most in South Africa, at least, were universities and the early ISPs.
The universities still exists and their ip address needs have grown,
so some have requested extra space from Afrinic. Most of the early
ISPs are either still there, sometimes with a different name or has
been merged to form bigger ISPs. Their ip address space needs will not
shrink, it will just grow.
Yes, I guess there will be some transfer from Afrinic organisations.
There might be some that say got a /16 and then realise that they can
live with less. They will then have to renumber to use only a part of
it, and could then sell the rest.
One clause that I would be quite happy with is something like "Once
you have sold IPv4 address space, you are not eligible to get any from
Afrinic again", instead of the 12 month period.
On Sun, 14 Jul 2019 at 18:32, SOUAD ABIDI <fs_abidi at esi.dz> wrote:
> If you define the benefit is money or power, I already said it, Afrinic takes no money and makes no approval, so the answer is nothing, its role will be to supervise the contract and that everything works well.
> For the region, members can lease the extra block they have and make money behind, so we will avoid the undertable transfer.
> The question is as Jordi said, will we be able to convince other RIRs to adopt this policy to ensure the bidirectional transfer? I think each region is interested that its resources stay for its members and don't run out from the region from one hand , and benefit from other regions' resources from another hand , to balance between the two ,IPv4 leasing is an option to consider !
> Le sam. 13 juil. 2019 à 19:29, Gregoire Ehoumi <gregoire.ehoumi at yahoo.fr> a écrit :
>> You did not reply to my question.
>> Again, how does this leasing benefit AfriNIC or our region?
>> ------ Original message------
>> From: SOUAD ABIDI
>> Date: Sat, Jul 13, 2019 5:19 AM
>> To: Gregoire Ehoumi;
>> Cc: AfriNIC List;
>> Subject:Re: [rpd] inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR policy proposals
>> I guess ,when it will no IPv4 remain in other regions(which is soon the case) ,nobody will negociate the conditions of the pool's owner (Africa).
>> If we notice that our resources run out from the region after the transfer , we can bring them back to Africa (afriNIC will not accept the renewal of the contract between the seller and the buyer).
>> Le ven. 12 juil. 2019 ?? 20:37, Gregoire Ehoumi <gregoire.ehoumi at yahoo.fr> a ??crit :
>>> Hi Souad,
>>> How will this type of contract benefit AfriNIC and our region?
>>> ------ Original message------
>>> From: SOUAD ABIDI
>>> Date: Fri, Jul 12, 2019 6:50 AM
>>> To: AfriNIC List;
>>> Subject:[rpd] inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR policy proposals
>>> As IPv4 are finite and if we do the transfer, our resources may run out from our region-since there is no a explicit control motioned in the policy - As some people argue.
>>> Here what I suggest :
>>> ?? Establishing a leasing contract between the seller and the buyer up to 5 years with a possibility to renew it and AfriNIC will be the 3rd part of the deal .
>>> ?? AfriNIC takes no money and makes no approval.
>>> ?? The buyer needs to be registered somehow in the world.
>>> ?? The contract needs to be signed by the 3 parts (afriNIC-seller-buyer)
>>> So buy adopting this approach and if we notice that our resources are running out from our region, we can decide to bring them back and the companies do not renew the contract with .
>>> Best regards.
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
More information about the RPD