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

[rpd] AFRINIC Number Resources Transfer Policy

Fernando Frediani fhfrediani at gmail.com
Sun Nov 10 22:48:26 UTC 2019


This small number of very large organizations *who are able to justify a
/13 or more* are very unlikely to exist in Africa right now. And as
mentioned, even if it's the case this doesn't stop them to keep working
and serving their customers, it's not a binary thing. They can still
receive a /13 and keep working until Phase 2 is triggered soon. If the
few that may exist get - and are able to justify a /13 at once - then
Phase 2 will happen sooner and they will be able to transfer whatever
else they need afterwards. I think that is very reasonable and works
fine even for these unlikely situations.

As mentioned the real numbers are the key to this and only staff can
provide them, but I don't think it's even necessary to bother really. By
looking at the latest NRO numbers from September that doesn't seem the case.

Fernando

On 10/11/2019 19:31, Owen DeLong wrote:

>

>

>> On Nov 10, 2019, at 14:01 , Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com

>> <mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com>> wrote:

>>

>> In practice this situation you describe is very hard to happen, we

>> cannot have things in place to treat the very unlikely situation and

>> that Phase 2 is about to happen soon. Until there the vast majority

>> or organization (really the vast!) can get addresses from AfriNic fine.

>>

> So the small number of large operators should just be screwed over and

> enjoy it during that time?

>

> The fact that the number of operators being screwed over isn’t so much

> relevant when the number of users being screwed over by proxy in that

> process is so large.

>

> I’m not sufficiently familiar with the numbers in  Africa to present

> an accurate example, so I will draw from what I do know.

>

> There are maybe 20 or so major providers in North America and

> thousands of smaller ones. However, if you look at the customer base

> served, you’ll see that those 20 or so major providers probably

> represent close to 80% of the customers in the area.

>>

>> I hardly doubt one can justify anything more than a /13 at once at

>> the moment. Even in a remote hypothesis that is possible the

>> organization can receive the /13 and work with that until transfers

>> are allowed as per Jordi's proposal that has been changed to start

>> with Phase 2 is triggered and that organization will be able to

>> transfer whatever else is needed.

>>

>

> Again, I don’t know the exact situation in Africa, but I can easily

> see major expansions of the type being conducted by at least a handful

> of providers in Africa, the most underserved continent in the world,

> as requiring significantly more than a /13.

>

> Even if we assume residential only and only a /32 per household, a /13

> only serves roughly 512,000 households and that’s if you can somehow

> make it nearly 100% efficient with no addressing overhead (pretty

> unlikely in any real world scenario).

>>

>> One rule for all and much simpler.

>>

> Sure, but that rule should include the ability to transfer if you

> choose. Obviously until AfriNIC hits Phase 2 (which will happen soon

> as you mention), transfer would be undesirable except for a small

> number of very large organizations. However, once phase 2 comes into

> play, Likely, we will hit phase 2 before this policy could be ratified

> at this point anyway.

>

> Once we hit phase 2, surely the scenario I describe becomes not only

> probable, but common place. Trying to run an ISP of any size by

> repeatedly requesting /22s and using them up is absurd.

>

> Owen

>

>> Fernando

>>

>> On 10/11/2019 18:51, Owen DeLong wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>> On Nov 10, 2019, at 10:51 , Chevalier du Borg

>>>> <virtual.borg at gmail.com <mailto:virtual.borg at gmail.com>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Le dim. 10 nov. 2019 à 21:58, Jaco Kroon <jaco at uls.co.za

>>>> <mailto:jaco at uls.co.za>> a écrit :

>>>>

>>>> Hi Chevalier.

>>>>

>>>> Please allow me to be blunt. That's short sighted.

>>>>

>>>> We cannot transfer IN from other regions unless we allow OUT.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Agree 100%,

>>>> Then you have no problems with wait till all RIRs are equal run out

>>>> before we etablish full in and out transfer policy no?

>>>>

>>>> All the other RIRs require reciprocal *compatible* policies,

>>>> which means bi-directional transfers.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> All RIRs don't all have equal amount of free space. Big difference

>>>

>>> Depending on your definition here, 4 out of 5 have exactly equal

>>> amount == 0.

>>>

>>>> Not allowing this means we can't get resources in either.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> While AfriNIC have free space, operators don't need it

>>>> When it run out, then we can allow transfer policy

>>>

>>> This isn’t entirely true.

>>>

>>> It’s possible that an operator needs more than they can get via

>>> current AfriNIC policies due to “soft landing” limitations.

>>>

>>> In such a case, said operator might prefer to transfer a large

>>> amount of space in even if they are paying for it on the market

>>> rather than suffer with the small amount of space they can get from

>>> AfriNIC due to the current restrictions.

>>>

>>> Is there a valid reason to preclude such a transfer which, in

>>> reality, prolongs the AfriNIC free pool to the benefit of other

>>> organizations in Africa?

>>>

>>> Owen

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> RPD mailing list

>>> RPD at afrinic.net

>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>> _______________________________________________

>> RPD mailing list

>> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20191110/02ad17a5/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the RPD mailing list