Search RPD Archives
[rpd] [Community-Discuss] Cloud Innovation Displays Very Poor, If Not Criminal, Netizenship
Daniel Yakmut
yakmutd at googlemail.com
Tue Jun 2 12:24:46 UTC 2020
I prefer we use the phrase "Underground Market"as against "Black Market".
On 01/06/2020 7:23 pm, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:
>
> We have failed on this, and not just in Africa.
>
> We have invested a lot in training engineers, but we haven’t reached
> decision makers in a way that convince them sufficiently to take the
> decision. Some years ago, it was not so easy to probe the point about
> the cost savings, because we were advocating for dual-stack. But
> dual-stack is no longer a possible long-term strategy, and now it
> shows that IPv6-only is much cheaper and possible (IPv6-only
> transition is “relatively” new).
>
> Regards,
>
> Jordi
>
> @jordipalet
>
> El 1/6/20 19:45, "Kangamutima zabika Christophe"
> <funga.roho at yandex.com <mailto:funga.roho at yandex.com>> escribió:
>
> + community-discuss@
>
> Owen et Noah.
>
> Est ce que depuis toutes ces années où Afrinic fait une
> sensibilisation massive sur la migration à IPV6 Afrinic s'est-il posé
> la question la raison de la FORTE RETICENCE de grands opérateurs
> téléphoniques (principaux fournisseurs actuels à travers l'internet
> mobile ). Parcequ'à mon avis si le maintien de l'essentiel de
> l'infrastructure d'un opérateur comme Airtel, MTN ou Orange dans IPV4
> lui couterait plus cher, ils auraient déjà migré sans qu'Afrinic ne
> leur rappelle à tout moment. Afrinic a déjà mené des formations, des
> atéliers en tout genre plus de 30 pays africains mais très peu ont
> véritablement basculé au IPV6. Je pense que la méthode coercitive la
> bonne (incitation ou obligation des régulateurs, etc.). Il suffirait
> d'avoir un argumentaire pertinent, présenté des avantages (tant
> techniques qu'économiques) et retombées évidentes pour les opérateurs
> de téléphonie, et FAI opérant en Afrique pour qu'ils l'adoptent dans
> l'ensemble. Tant qu'on se borne sur les memes arguments qui ont
> démontré leur faiblesse depuis plus d'une décennie rien ne changera.
>
> KANGAMUTIMA
>
> 01.06.2020, 05:13, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com>:
>
> The opinions below are mine and mine alone. They are not official
> positions of any organization I may be affiliated with…(Several of
> which probably prefer I not post them)
>
> On May 31, 2020, at 14:37 , Noah <noah at neo.co.tz
> <mailto:noah at neo.co.tz>> wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 10:02 PM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com
> <mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
>
> On May 31, 2020, at 11:40 , Noah <noah at neo.co.tz
> <mailto:noah at neo.co.tz>> wrote:
>
> See inline....
>
> We were not faced with a choice between “Implement
> transfer markets or not.” We were faced with a
> choice of “Recognize transfer markets and
>
> regulate them or ensure that they are black
> markets and that the RIR system and its IPv4
> policies become irrelevant to the actual operation of
>
> the internet.”
>
> And black markets still exist nonetheless (a failure
> of responsible audits and accountability) irrespective
> of existing transfer markets imho.
>
> Most of the places where black markets exist with any
> significance are places with unreasonably restrictive
> transfer policies. It’s not so much a failure of
> responsible audits and
>
> accountability as a failure of policy to adapt to reality.
>
> The AfriNIC region has an IPv4 transfer within the AfriNIC
> region policy [link 1] where under section 5.7 there are
> provisions that permit transfers of IPv4 address space within
> Africa, therefore one would not claim that there are
> unreasonable restrictions.
>
> This depends on your definition of reasonable restrictions, I suppose.
>
> But if responsible audits were to be attempted to ensure
> compliance and accountability that would go to resolve the
> apparent black market.
>
> Would it? I can think of several ways to legitimately transfer the
> use of addresses without necessarily transferring or altering the
> registration at AfriNIC, none of which would be a violation of
> AfriNIC policies as currently written.
>
> My definition of a black market is any effective transfer which is
> not recorded in the RIR database.
>
> Perhaps your definition is any effective transfer which violates
> policy.
>
> Those are very different definitions. The former will not be
> prevented or addressed in any effective way through auditing. The
> latter is a much narrower definition, and would only catch people
> incapable of minimal creative thought.
>
> People are seeing the current overly restrictive transfer
> policy in the AfriNIC region as damage and routing around it.
>
> Well the AfriNIC Bylaws [link 2] Section 3 [Objectives of the
> Company], sub section (iii) below ensures;
>
> *(iii) to promote responsible management of Internet resources
> throughout the African region, as well as the responsible
> development and operation of Internet infrastructures;*
>
> Surely, AfriNIC as a company can not just forget its own
> responsibility as bestowed to her in the Bylaws. The people
> who are seeing this as overly restrictive should understand
> that we can not break our own rules/laws and I don't see how
> such restrictions are a damage if they are meant to ensure
> that number resources within the AfriNIC region are put to
> good use for the purpose they were requested for in order to
> develop the Internet in Africa.
>
> I’m not suggesting that they should. We have agreed to disagree on
> what constitutes compliance with that requirement in the past. I
> see no reason that will change in the foreseeable future.
>
> So now we have folks with capital spending
> most of their energy moving IPv4 address space
> all over the place since its a currency that
> ensures serious economic benefits.
>
> If you know of a way to stop this, I’m all ears.
>
> Impossible to stop economic activities.
>
> Thus, we felt it was better in the ARIN region to provide
> reasonable accommodation while still preserving useful
> aspects of regulation. I think we have achieved
>
> a good balance there and that there’s relatively little
> black market movement of IPv4 resources in the ARIN region
> which has also made it possible to have
>
> better accountability (for example the recent reclamation
> of a large quantity of improperly transferred address space).
>
> What works in ARIN may not necessarily work in the AfrNIC
> region but there are currently some policy proposals the
> working group are looking at within AfriNIC. We shall see how
> that goes as we adhere to our Bylaws.
>
> Sure… Conversely, however, just because it’s Africa doesn’t
> necessarily mean that what works elsewhere won’t work there. Far
> more similarities exist than differences.
>
> Faced with the business externalities that they
> are, they really have no choice but to try
>
> and acquire enough IPv4 to support customer demand
> for as long as possible. I can assure you that
> each of them would love to see customer demand for
> IPv4 go away.
>
> Hence my point that both shall co-exist for years. So
> we cant devalue IPv4 in an attempt to promote IPv6 and
> this is why responsible management of IPv4 space must
> be ensured.
>
> Nobody said that devaluing IPv4 was a way to promote IPv6…
> We said that deploying IPv6 would devalue IPv4.
>
> Ok understood, but my point was that the deployment of IPv6 is
> not a clear cut process as folks seem to suggest since the
> decisions are internal for each entity.
>
> Oh, it is a clear cut process. The timetable is unclear because
> each entity gets to implement on their own schedule, but the
> process is very clear cut and the sooner more entities do deploy
> IPv6, the better for everyone else.
>
> Nonetheless, regardless of the timeframe, the fact remains that
> the best and most effective way to devalue IPv4 is to deploy IPv6.
>
> OTOH, IPv6 is available to the vast majority of
> eyeballs in the US. Comcast has 100% IPv6
> coverage, as do most of the major cellular
> carriers. AIUI, the other major
>
> eyeball ISPs in the US are fast approaching that.
>
> One can attribute different factors to such outcomes
> beyond just the US.
>
> I cited the US as an example because it is the market with
> which I have the greatest familiarity. If you want another
> good example outside of the US, look at the current rate
> of IPv6 adoption around India.
>
> Globally, Google is seeing more than 30% of their traffic
> via IPv6. The prime laggards according to their map are
> northern Asia, Russia, Greenland, the Middle East, and the
> vast majority of Africa.
>
> In fact, Africa is by far, the least deployed continent
> for IPv6, with notable exceptions in Togo and Gabon and
> problematic deployments in Kenya and Burundi.
>
> I think you will see spontaneous deployment of IPv6 across
> China in the near future. Being as all the major ISPs in
> China are essentially one organization owned by the
> government, when the mandate finally comes, implementation
> and deployment will be quite rapid.
>
> I like the "you will see spontaneous deployment of IPv6" part
> of your response but IPv4 is still useful for a while.
>
> Nobody said it wasn’t.
>
> Nonetheless, it is a fact that IPv4 is:
>
> + Increasing in cost both acquisition cost and operational cost.
>
> + Decreasing in functionality
>
> + At some point will be capable of reaching a declining subset of
> the full internet.
>
> Atleast this is how I see it. Capitalism at
> its best.
>
> Or one of the finest examples of how capitalism is
> nearly as flawed as the alternatives.
>
> No system is perfect after all.
>
> Agreed… But people love to tout th failures of socialism
> while often ignoring those same failures in a different
> form in capitalism.
>
> In socialism, the lack of reward for effort and the lack
> of incentive to rise above is cited quite often.
>
> In capitalism, the failure to tie reward and/or incentive
> to a greater good is mostly overlooked. The concept of
> perverse incentives occasionally gets mentioned, but
> usually in arguing for deregulation which often
> exacerbates the most harmful perverse incentives.
>
> The take away for me is that both have pros and cons however,
> for any industry to thrive in either systems, raw-materials
> are extremely important since they form part of the means of
> production. Textile factories in both a socialist and
> capitalist systems would still require Cotton as a raw material.
>
> A textile factory can use cotton. In many cases, it can also use
> polyester, rayon, dacron, nylon, hemp, wool, or a variety of other
> fibers. In Uganda, textiles have been made of fibers from tree bark.
>
> There are many alternatives and if Cotton became scarce and
> expensive, most textile production would shift to other materials
> rather rapidly.
>
> In our case within the Internet Industry, IPv4 addresses (just
> like IPv6) are the scarce resources which form part of the
> means of production for the final service the Internet. As
> such, responsible management of INR is akeen to the promotion
> and development of the Internet Industry in Africa which so
> many on the continent have come to rely on to sell their
> labor, research & education, economic activities, social life etc.
>
> In our case, IPv4 and IPv6 are both raw materials. In an ideal
> world, by now, they would be functional equivalents and could be
> used interchangeably.
>
> Unfortunately, that ship has sailed and we are where we are. As
> such, the textile comparison fails because we have cotton and
> wool, but currently only 40% of the population can wear wool,
> while 100% of the population can wear cotton, but we only have
> enough cotton to make garments for 1/5th of the worlds population,
> thus every person wanting to wear a cotton garment must share that
> garment with at least 4 other strangers.
>
> Owen
>
> ,
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
> --
>
> Christophe KANGAMUTIMA ZABIKA
>
> _______________________________________________ RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
>
> **********************************************
> IPv4 is over
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> http://www.theipv6company.com
> The IPv6 Company
>
> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged
> or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive
> use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty
> authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of
> this information, even if partially, including attached files, is
> strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you
> are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying,
> distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
> partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be
> considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original
> sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> 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/20200602/45f4cd94/attachment.html>
More information about the RPD
mailing list