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

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

Sarah T. Kiden skiden at
Thu Jul 29 12:00:41 UTC 2021

Hi Jaco,

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> 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 ( 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).


> 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

> resources?


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...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list