Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Revised Proposal | Resource Transfer Policy (Draft-2)
Jaco Kroon
jaco at uls.co.za
Fri Sep 18 09:13:45 UTC 2020
A nee could be to sell them.
I'm in favour of keeping delays.
Kind Regards,
Jaco
On 2020/09/18 09:59, Marius Andioc via RPD wrote:
> Dear Jordi,
>
> This would be the case if there was absolutely no safeguard, which is
> not the case.
>
> Transfer and Allocation policies are both need based, which implies
> for both source and entities to be able to justify their transfers. If
> one asks for new resources after just transferring them, it will need
> to justify its needs in a very different context than one who didn't
> transfer. Justifying a need of resources will be more demanding as
> being in the position of transferring makes you suspicious.
>
> I think the need requirements are sufficient safeguards and we should
> preserve a mechanism as simple as possible to allocate resources
> efficiently.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marius
>
>
> Le 18 sept. 2020 00:12, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net>
> a écrit :
>
> I disagree.
>
>
>
> Having no “wait” time to get new resources, is prone to abuse.
>
>
>
> Having no “hold” time, once to received AFRINIC resources, to
> transfer them, is prone to abuse.
>
>
>
> It is rationally impossible to justify otherwise.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Jordi
>
> @jordipalet
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> El 17/9/20 9:11, "lucilla fornaro"
> <lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com
> <mailto:lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com>> escribió:
>
>
>
> Hello Cathy,
>
>
>
> You made a good observation. Afrinic only has 3% of world space,
> which means that there is not a real reason to worry. This
> transfer policy will finally put Afrinic in the same position as
> the other RIRs.
>
> 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. And this will make the
> difference once the IPv4 resources will be depleted.
>
>
>
> Most importantly, it is not up to Afrinic to offer a fraud
> prevention service, and this policy does not in any way encourage
> malicious or fraudulent activities.
>
>
>
>
>
> best wishes,
>
>
>
> Lucilla
>
>
>
> Il giorno gio 17 set 2020 alle ore 04:29 Cathie Jay
> <cathie.kay89 at gmail.com <mailto:cathie.kay89 at gmail.com>> ha scritto:
>
> 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
> <mailto:dc at darwincosta.com> <dc at darwincosta.com
> <mailto:dc at darwincosta.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 15 Sep 2020, at 17:53, Daniel Yakmut via RPD
> <rpd at afrinic.net <mailto: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
> <mailto: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
> <mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com>>
> >> Sent: Monday, September 14, 2020 2:46 PM
> >> To: rpd at afrinic.net <mailto: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 <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 <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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> **********************************************
> 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/20200918/6d5e2e62/attachment.html>
More information about the RPD
mailing list