[rpd] Policy Proposal: in-region vs out-of-region use of resources, and restrictions thereon

[Sami Ait Ali Oulahcen]

On 7/28/21 1:41 PM, Jaco Kroon wrote:
> Hi All,

Hi Jaco,

> 
> I believe that it's plain that AFRINIC was established for the benefit 
> of the African continent, this is even enshrined in the by-laws, as 
> detailed in section 3.4.  I believe sub-point (i) summarises it quite well:
> 
> /(i)to provide the service of allocating and registering Internet 
> resources for the purposes of enabling communications via open system 
> network protocols and to assist in the development and growth of the 
> Internet in the //*African*//region; [emphasis added]/
> 
> 
> I won't quote the rest of it here, but the rest of the section is 
> equally relevant (https://afrinic.net/bylaws#b20-3) and makes it plain 
> that everything AFRINIC does should be for the benefit of the African 
> continent (region).  Even the *membership* is based on this regional 
> affinity:
> 
> /MEMBERSHIP - 6.1//
> //Membership shall be open to://
> //(i) any Person [including non-natural persons eg companies] who is 
> *geographically based within*, and *providing services in the African 
> region*, and who is engaged in the use of, or business of providing, 
> open system protocol network services;/
> 
> That is - the member is based in the AFRINIC region.  This applies to 
> all three classes of members (Registered, Resource and Associate).
> 
> It is also implied here that the resources are for use within the 
> African continent.
> 
> Over the last while it's become apparent that many people are extremely 
> unhappy about the fact that Afrinic resources are being used 
> off-continent.  Based on the above I think it's a fair 
> assumption/expectation (as well as appropriate) that at least the 
> majority of issued resources should be used in-region (In particular 
> IPv4 resources).
> 
> I believe it to be appropriate at this time to state this as policy in 
> the CPM, and thereby to make the general sentiment I've seen plain as 
> day.  This should then apply to all issued resources retrospectively as 
> well.  Not only newly issued resources (which is currently already dealt 
> with from the soft landing policy).
> 

Nice initiative !

> I request from the community opinions on the following:
> 
> 1.  If you had to assign a percentage to out-of-region use, what 
> percentage of resources allocated from AFRINIC would be considered "fair 
> usage" for out of region use (I'm thinking "At least 50% of issued 
> resources should be used in-region", or then "less than 50% of resources 
> may be used out-of-region"); and
> 

I'd say 80%/20% for anything above a /16, 20% out-of-region is plenty to 
support connectivity back to Africa.

> 2.  Assuming that a policy gets passed to enforce some form of in-region 
> use - what would be an acceptable amount of time to provide members to 
> comply (I'm thinking either 6 or 12 months, definitely no longer than 18 
> unless someone can justify that sensibly) with respect to existing 
> resources?

I think it could take more, but that's just me.

> 
> You're welcome to differentiate between different types of resources 
> (for example, I don't think it makes sense to have to get a separate AS 
> number just because a company is multi-continent, so here as long as the 
> AS is also used in-region).  Space on v6 is of such a nature that I'm 
> inclined to say "who cares".

Agreed on both.

> 
> Currently the only restriction in the CPM regarding resource usage 
> relates to IPv4 during soft-landing 
> (https://afrinic.net/policy/manual#Soft-Landing relating specifically to 
> the last /8.  The fact that this can just be used in-region and then 
> move other existing resources out-of-region is of concern to me and this 
> is part of the "problem" I'd like to address in a policy update.
> 

Good luck.

Cheers !
Sami

> Kind Regards,
> Jaco Kroon
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>