Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Revised Proposal | Resource Transfer Policy (Draft-2)
Fernando Frediani
fhfrediani at gmail.com
Mon Sep 14 18:45:32 UTC 2020
On 14/09/2020 15:21, Ekaterina Kalugina wrote:
> <clip>
>
> In addition, I would argue it is not up to the RIR to decide who are
> “bad guys” and what are “malicious activities.” It is my conviction
> (please do correct me if I am wrong), that RIRs are merely
> registration entities and therefore cannot pass judgment of whether
> the receiver of transfer is a “good” or a “bad” guy. RIRs also should
> not have any interest for which purpose the resources are used as long
> as “technical need” is proven. Also, according to my knowledge of how
> the international economy works – it doesn’t matter if it is “good” or
> “bad” guys who are requesting the transfer of resources, long as there
> is a free flow of resources, and the commissions are being paid and
> taxed, it should only bolster the economy in the region.
It is up to the RIR to oversee how resources are used and if they are
not used for the proposes they were originally justified they should be
recovered and re-assigned to other organizations who commit to use them
how they should be: to make the Internet work, evolve and to get more
people connected to it.
If organizations are just holding IP space in order to make them worth
more in order to sell them later and profit from it then they are not
using this scarce resource as originally justified and they better be
re-distributed to those who really need them.We are talking about a
scarce shared owned resource and not a private properly which can be
produced any anytime.
If no justification would be necessary then it would be unfair with
those who need the IP space to make the internet to work.
Overall it is up to the RIR to determine the rules and conditions these
resources be justified which is done on each regional policy forum.
Furthermore each organization signs an contract with the RIR agreeing to
bind to these rules in order to keep these resources.
>
> In any case, I think we need to abstract ourselves from using moral
> categories and focus on the important issues, which are, in my view,
> facilitating the economic development of the African region and
> putting AFRINIC on equal ground with other RIRs. As far as I can see,
> this policy does precisely that. Therefore, I wholeheartedly support it.
Having an organization to justify the need of resources doesn't block
any economic development in the region. It's actually the contrary.If
people are allowed to hold resources without any justification then they
will end up on the hands of those who can pay more and not on the hands
of those who really need them, making it more difficult for the internet
to progress in the region.
Fernando
>
> Warmest wishes,
>
> Ekaterina Kay Kalugina
>
> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020, 09:51 JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD
> <rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>> wrote:
>
> If we are asking all the organizations to justify the need and to
> have some wait time for more resources, why we want to have a
> different view on the transfers?
>
> This only helps bad guys that want to use the resources for
> malicious activities and also makes brokers getting more commissions.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jordi
>
> @jordipalet
>
> El 14/9/20 5:30, "lucilla fornaro"
> <lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com
> <mailto:lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com>> escribió:
>
> I agree with your idea that basically corruption may occur (like
> in any other policy and in any other RIR) but there are
> instruments to avoid it and supervise.
>
> I believe that by not supporting organizations that need it due to
> possible dishonesty, we only generate damage and a dangerous
> precedent.
>
> Lucilla
>
> Il giorno lun 14 set 2020 alle ore 11:49 Fernando Frediani
> <fhfrediani at gmail.com <mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com>> ha scritto:
>
> This type of justification in my view is a justification that
> only benefits brokers and those who are willing to financially
> speculate from IP space instead of using it for what they
> should be, and goes on the opposite direction of other regions
> even after their respective exhaustion phases.
>
> Fernando
>
> On Sun, 13 Sep 2020, 23:38 lucilla fornaro,
> <lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com
> <mailto:lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I think that with this proposal AFRINIC would fully be
> able to support any kind of organization in this uncertain
> period. In fact, due to the pandemic situation it is clear
> that unexpected problems may occur any time. AFRINIC
> should be able to transfer resources even to those that
> gave up assigned resources during the previous 12 months.
> Only this way it’s possible to facilitate the flow of
> resources from those who have them in excess ( and don’t
> use them) to those who need them and cannot afford to wait
> 12 months.
>
> The issue concerning workload is relevant because as the
> proposal supports, transfers won’t need approval from
> Afrinic. This and the section 5.7.5 will help a lot to
> make the overall working system more efficient.
>
> I also think that “no upper limit regarding the amount of
> transfers” (section 5.7.3.3) will make a difference when
> IPv4 will be definitely depleted.
>
> Lucilla
>
> Il giorno ven 11 set 2020 alle ore 02:53 Fernando Frediani
> <fhfrediani at gmail.com <mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com>> ha
> scritto:
>
> Releasing organizations from 12 months period doesn't
> make any sense and goes in the opposite way of good
> sense. So someone who gave up their just assigned
> resources transferring to someone else. What is the
> sense of it ?
>
> Smaller organizations can receive resources from
> AfricNic directly in Phase 2, so why would they need
> to make such transfers ? Also I don't think anyone is
> against allowing transfers Intra and Inter-RIR at the
> current stage. That's not the problem.
>
> I cannot understand what type of "issue" it can cause
> in terms of workload to the RIR and the time required
> for each request ? What does one thing have to do with
> the other ? If a request fulfill the minimal
> requirements there are no delays or extra workload do
> process the request.
>
> Regarding the "enrichment of its own financial pocket
> by Allocation Fees" this is still possible for any
> organizations who requests blocks according to Phase 2
> so that statement is not correct either.
>
> There is a better well written proposal to allow
> Inter-RIR transfers under discussion which is and I
> invite others to support it instead which is "IPv4
> Inter-RIR Resource Transfers (Comprehensive Scope)
> Draft-4 ". This one fulfill completely the need of
> Inter-RIR transfers for the region.
>
> Regards
> Fernando
>
> On 10/09/2020 11:31, lucilla fornaro wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> My name is Lucilla, I graduated in Law and I am
> currently attending a Master Degree in
> International Business. I would like to give my
> contribution to the discussion.
>
> For 5.7.3.2 <http://5.7.3.2>: The barrier of 12
> months represents an issue for many entities that
> need to face unexpected problems. AFRINIC needs to
> allow a smoother and faster resource transfer to
> support both smaller organizations’ growth, as
> well as enrich its own financial pocket by the
> Allocation Fees that need to be covered by
> entities that are not member yet.
>
> And for what concerns other RIR like LACNIC, its
> policy is proving to create some issue. They, as
> well as the other RIRs, are facing a heavy
> workload because of the dilatation of time
> required for each request, that once approved need
> to be included into another waiting list due to
> quarantine reasons. These complications cannot be
> smoothly managed by AFRINIC due its shortage of
> workforce. The section 5.7.3.2 would make the
> overall working system more efficient.
> Furthermore, LACNIC entered phase 3 (back in 2017)
> of the IPv4 Exhaustion, meanwhile AFRINIC is
> facing a different situation.
>
> I strongly support Section 5.7.3.3
> <http://5.7.3.3>: it is positive not to have an
> upper limit regarding the amount of transfer
> because this will facilitate the flow of
> addresses. IPv4 addresses within the region will
> soon be depleted, transfer policy for IPv4
> resources within and outside the region is
> strongly needed.
>
> Lucilla
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Da:*Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com>
> <mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com>
> *Inviato:* Thursday, September 10, 2020 1:49:44 PM
> *A:* rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>
> <rpd at afrinic.net> <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>
> *Oggetto:* Re: [rpd] Revised Proposal | Resource
> Transfer Policy (Draft-2)
>
> I see that point 5.7.3.2 goes in the opposite way
> of the obvious.
> If an organization gave up of its IP address space
> because it doesn't have usage for it anymore, why
> would it be allowed to receive more resources from
> AfriNic in short term ?
> Organizations receive IP space upon justification
> expected to be used to serve their customers in a
> certain time frame ahead. If sudden it realizes
> these addresses are not necessary anymore and
> transfer them to some other organization who
> really need them why would the source entity be
> allowed to receive even further space ?
> It is not correct to say it drags Afrinic service
> region backwards in comparison to other RIRs.
> LACNIC and ARIN for example have similar policies
> in regards this topic.
>
> 5.7.3.3. doesn't make sense either to be changed.
> The current text is correct and has a proper
> reason to be like this, otherwise it opens doors
> to fraud and to organizations to receive IP space
> form Afrinic and immediately to transfer to
> someone else who cannot receive them anymore under
> the current exhaustion rules.
>
> Therefore I oppose this proposal.
>
> Fernando
>
> On 09/09/2020 11:40, Ibeanusi Elvis wrote:
>
> Hello Everyone,
>
> My Name is Ibeanusi Elvis. I am a Masters
> student of Global Law, Politics and Peace and
> Conflict Studies at the Tokyo University of
> Foreign Studies. Highly Interested in Internet
> Governance and Policy Making specifically
> within the AFRINIC service region.
>
> In regards to this proposal, I support the
> Proposed Section 5.7.3.2 as source entities
> are eligible to receive further IPv4
> allocations or assignments from AFRINIC as
> long as it complies with current policy
> because a 12 month non-eligibility delay
> period after transfer approval diminishes,
> hinders and is detrimental to the operational,
> developmental and growth of businesses within
> the AFRINIC region. Hence, dragging the
> African continent and AFRINIC service region
> backwards in comparison with other RIRs.
>
> Additionally, Section 5.7.3.2 and Section
> 5.7.5.3 ensures a swift communication between
> the transferring and receiving RIRs to enhance
> a smooth transfer and receive of allocations
> and assignments.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ibeanusi Elvis .C.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> RPD mailing list
>
> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto: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
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto: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
>
>
> **********************************************
> 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 <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200914/c00e754f/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the RPD
mailing list