Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Policy Proposal: in-region vs out-of-region use of resources, and restrictions thereon
Sarah T. Kiden
skiden at gmail.com
Thu Jul 29 12:00:41 UTC 2021
Thank you for getting this started. Please see some comments in-line below.
On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 1:42 PM Jaco Kroon <jaco at uls.co.za> wrote:
> Hi All,
> 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
> 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).
> 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
50% minimum sounds good, though if it was possible, 60%+ would be better.
> 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
6 - 12 months is reasonable.
> 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".
Agree, re: AS number.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD