[rpd] Revised Proposal | Resource Transfer Policy (Draft-2)

[Blaise Fyama]

Chers tous,

Issu, d’une région fortement minière ou je sais que lorsqu’on possède des
ressources à l’état brute on ne peut s’en sortir qu’en interagissant
intelligemment avec le reste du monde dans une perspective gagnant-gagnant,
d'autant plus que le reste du monde possède principalement les atouts de
plus-values technologiques et en termes d’équipements de pointe permettant
la valorisation des minerais ainsi que leur exploitation. Le secret est
dans un transfert intelligent.

Une politique inter-RIR bidirectionnelle, gagnant-gagnant et savamment
peaufinée me semble être une démarche à soutenir. Le travail des amis
Anthony et Taiwo est un outil efficace réaliste et judicieux qui participe
au bon fonctionnement, au développement et à la croissance des entreprises
dans la région. Cette proposition vise à mettre en place un mécanisme
efficace et favorable aux entreprises afin de permettre le transfert d'un
certain nombre de ressources depuis ou vers d'autres régions.

En l’occurrence les points suivants :

-          *5.7.3.1** La source doit être le détenteur actuel des droits
des ressources d'adresse IPv4 enregistrées auprès de tout RIR et doit être
en conformité avec les politiques du RIR récepteur. *En effet* « être en
conformité avec les politiques du RIR récepteur »* est une contrainte de
stabilité dans la relation qui est très diplomatique et positive.



-          *5.7.4.1 : ce point est un coup d’assurance et de vigilance
d’AFRINIC envers ses partenaires.*

Pour ces deux raisons et pour plusieurs autres je soutiens cette politique.


Cordialement,
                     Blaise FYAMA
Msc, PhD.
Professeur Associé
Secrétaire Général Académique Honoraire/UL
Doyen de la Faculté des Sciences Informatiques/UPL
Doyen a.i de la Faculté Polytechnique/UPL
Chef de Département Génie Electrique/ESI-UNILU
Chef de Service Informatique/Polytech-UNILU
Consultant Informatique BIT/PAEJK
Membre de International Research Conference IRC/WASET
Tel: +243995579515
Numéro O.N.I.CIV: 00460

MSc, PhD.

Associate Professor

Honorary Academic Secretary General / UL

Dean of the Faculty of Computer Science / UPL

Dean a.i of the Polytechnic Faculty / UPL

Head of Department of Electrical Engineering / ESI-UNILU

IT Service Manager / Polytech-UNILU

IT Consultant BIT / PAEJK

Member of International Research Conference IRC/WASET

Phone: +243995579515

O.N.I.CIV number: 00460


Le mer. 16 sept. 2020 à 21:29, Cathie Jay <cathie.kay89 at gmail.com> a écrit :


> Dear all,

>

> I fully support this policy which would allow a mutual transfer of

> resources between two or several African regions. It is a completely

> functional policy, which is primarily need-based. AFRINIC is the only

> RIR without a transfer policy and has only 3% of the world space.

> Therefore AFRINIC is gaining a lot more by adopting this policy. I

> would also add, after following the several discussions on the list,

> that this policy does not address internet fraud in any wat. What is

> enhanced here is the free flow of transfers.

>

> All best wishes,

>

> Cathie

>

>

> On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 7:03 PM dc at darwincosta.com <dc at darwincosta.com>

> wrote:

> >

> >

> > On 15 Sep 2020, at 17:53, Daniel Yakmut via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net> wrote:

> >

> > 

> > The highlighted hurdles can hold up the policy reaching a consensus on

> time to be relevant.

> >

> > Hence I see the simplicity of the intra RIR transfer as something that

> we can agree on and put to use as soon as possible. The free flow market

> makes it attractive and self controlling.

> >

> > Self controlling? What do you mean by that?

> >

> > I rather stick with Fernando’s last quote:

> >

> > This talk about "free flow market" is something that only benefits those

> willing to misuse IP space and profit from it instead of using it for its

> main propose which is ensure Internet can continuing developing in the

> region.

> >

> >

> > Simply,

> > Daniel

> >

> >

> > Darwin-.

> >

> >

> > On Sep 14, 2020 8:21 PM, "Mike Burns" <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:

> >>

> >> Hello,

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Apologies for yet more input from outside the region.

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> We don’t want registries deciding good and evil uses for addresses, we

> want them accurately maintaining a list of unique numbers and their

> registrants, per the ancient RFC2050.

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> The future is just about here and will arrive when AFRINIC reaches full

> exhaust. It’s time for the registries to recognize that conservation, one

> of the original purposes of the RIRs, is now performed automatically by the

> market. People don’t waste valuable resources as a rule.

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Now is the time for the RIRs to concentrate on their only other purpose

> besides conservation, and that is accurate registration.  To meet the

> absolute requirement of unique registration, it’s important that RIRs do

> not implement policies that run counter to normal business activities like

> transfers, lest those policies engender things like unregistered leases or

> sales resulting in inaccurate registrations.

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> To bring this discussion back to the point, what is the likelihood that

> an AFRINIC member will have the time to justify and acquire addresses from

> AFRINIC, sell them to another AFRINIC member while the free pool still

> exists, and go back to the free pool for another allocation?  Remember

> there is still not inter-regional policy, so the only buyer would be

> another AFRINIC member who would have to justify his need in order to

> purchase addresses, and he could simply utilize that same justification to

> get the addresses directly from AFRINIC.

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> And this policy would still have to reach consensus and be implemented,

> making it that much farther away in time, as the remaining pool shrinks.

> >>

> >> I think it’s a moot point and resell limits as a rule are an impediment

> to a free-flowing market. And I say that as the original author of the 12

> month time limit in ARIN policy.

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> Regards,

> >> Mike Burns

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> From: Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com>

> >> Sent: Monday, September 14, 2020 2:46 PM

> >> To: rpd at afrinic.net

> >> Subject: Re: [rpd] Revised Proposal | Resource Transfer Policy (Draft-2)

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> 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> 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>

> 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> 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> 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> 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: 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: 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>

> >> Inviato: Thursday, September 10, 2020 1:49:44 PM

> >> A: rpd at afrinic.net <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

> >>

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

> >>

> >> _______________________________________________

> >> RPD mailing list

> >> 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

> >>

> >> _______________________________________________ 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

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> _______________________________________________

> >>

> >> RPD mailing list

> >>

> >> 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

> >>

> > _______________________________________________

> > RPD mailing list

> > 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

>

> _______________________________________________

> 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/20200917/3ebe7a4f/attachment-0001.html>