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

Fernando Frediani fhfrediani at
Thu Jul 29 16:04:46 UTC 2021

This is so clear, that it is still hard to understand how people can
keep defending that resources should be used out of the region, except
from those who profit from getting African resources to be sent out of
the continent.
There is enough amount of information giving reasons and impediments for
the resources to remain in the continent, but still there are people
that pretend that is not right, simply because they want that.

Sure any modification to the CPM to make it even more clear than it
already is applies to any resources and retrospectively. Policies in
general apply to all resources.

Although I think that at least 50% is a good start I don't really like
to have it in exact numbers because the main idea is that resources to
be used for development of Internet in the region and if necessary that
some minor part used out of the region fine as long it provides support
to the main stuff in the region. If had to have numbers I would say that
it should be even higher then that as suggest for example 75%/25% which
should be more than enough to back connectivity to Africa.

But it is important to highlight that 50% is not the same as majority.
*Majority is 50% + 1* which makes more sense. So if that would be the
exact rule turning that into numbers if a member holds a /22 then he
would only be able to use a /24 out of the region because /23 is NOT 50%
+ 1 of the /22 and /24 is the smaller allocation to be announced to the
Internet in general.

Regarding time I don't think that is the case because as it stands now
using most resources out of the region *is already forbidden*, therefore
if one is using it is already not complying to the rules and must stop
immediately. And even if one understands otherwise and if it is the same
someone it using ALL resources out of the region it should not be given
too much time to stop that given what that means to the context.


Em 28/07/2021 09:41, Jaco Kroon escreveu:


> 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


> 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?


> 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".


> Currently the only restriction in the CPM regarding resource usage

> relates to IPv4 during 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.


> Kind Regards,

> Jaco Kroon



> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at


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

More information about the RPD mailing list