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

[rpd] Leases and Flexibility

Fernando Frediani fhfrediani at
Tue Jul 6 00:59:42 UTC 2021

Please learn how to participate in a email list. Stop changing all
message subjects. You even replied to digest emails.
Please adequate yourself to the standards in order to properly participate.

On 05/07/2021 20:14, Paul Hjul wrote:


> Hi Noah,

> What you describe sounds nice if you are one of the established

> ISPs who

> are running a top to bottom network. However you can not say the same

> for smaller enterprises, too small to be an LIR, and unable to run

> full

> operations profitably, giving inability to afford the RIR/AFRINIC

> fees. I

> feel total reliance on network providers/carriers also limits

> flexibility,

> which goes more along the line of thinking from the ITU, than the

> spirit of

> the Internet, as set by the early pioneers of the Internet.

> No textbook analogy. IP leasing can allow the enterprise/organizations

> certain flexibility in administration. Like having a single contiguous

> range to numbers on all their interfaces and infrastructure either

> locally

> and across the cloud, for better administration and scaling of their

> network they need. This way all their IPs are unique and

> contiguous, and

> they can number their offices networks, servers, VPN etc. for easy

> management.

> So Yes, fully (physical)provider independent. Without the physical

> connection to provider being involved, that provider will still be

> there of

> course, but the end user is not forced to number their LAN with that

> provider's IP addresses.

> On another note, AFRINIC itself would give out such IP addresses as

> assignments with the same justifications, These provider-independent

> address space (PI) has some limitations in the current CPM. The PIs

> assignments are also called "leasing", and well.

> AFRINIC as a non profit organisation should not place itself in direct

> competition with its members.

> Resource owners are restricted from leasing, while the registry

> can lease

> out space as described in the policy, placing AFRINIC in a very

> awkward

> situation.


> *Best Regards,*



> *Anthony*


> Wholeheartedly agree


> Two points on this though:

> [1] The scenario of "top to bottom" providers who think of themselves

> in a telco-esque mindset is really deleterious to a competitive market

> and is not beneficial to consumers. Members of RIRs serve a function

> as an LIR not as an "operator who leases number resources from the

> RIR", it should be perfectly possible for an enterprise to contract

> with multiple companies one of which is an LIR to get the various

> resources that enterprise needs for their ICT services.

> [2] Even in the telco space this sort of ITU-esque thinking is under

> revision - the mantra amongst telco CEOs is "becoming a techco".


> The thinking will mean that transitioning to IPv6 on the continent

> will continue to be behind global trends.


> There certainly is space for a discussion as to whether there should

> be policies as to the nature of relationship between LIR and customer

> but the implicit big lie advanced by some on this group is that

> operators aren't indirectly charging their customers for the

> utilization of the "integers". My argument is that such policesare

> unlikely to be properly framed or scoped and will generally backfire

> but itsa legitimate discussion if people want to have it. There is

> also certainly discussion to be had as to requiring LIRs to undertake

> IPv6 operations which is something I am strongly in favour of.

> However that isn't the engagement that is happening.


> It is also probably worth reiterating that a situation in which there

> is major allocation fragmentation to member providers who are small

> operators really only serves to produce large membership fee

> collections and would inevitably line the pockets of several insiders.


> I had actually forgotthat Afrinic leases out address space on

> non-commercial terms under section 9 of the CPM and yes its further

> illustration of things.


> Paul




> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list