<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;">SM,<br>I am calling on Alain to help with the stat analysis for the current usage trends vs our assignment policy.<br><br>I will incorporate the new definitions.<br><br>The version on the Afrinic site is not current, please use the copy on the mailing list, doesn't have mention of critical infrastructure, we removed it as we found it infeasible to make allocation to critical infrastructure from the the /16 we are reserving.<br><br>Regards,<br>Douglas onyango +256(0712)981329<br>
If you are not part of the solution, your are part of the Problem.<br><br>--- On <b>Thu, 5/14/09, SM <i><sm@resistor.net></i></b> wrote:<br><blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;"><br>From: SM <sm@resistor.net><br>Subject: Re: [AfriNIC-rpd] Re: rpd Digest, Vol 37, Issue 2<br>To: "Douglas Onyango" <ondouglas@yahoo.com><br>Cc: rpd@afrinic.net<br>Date: Thursday, May 14, 2009, 5:18 PM<br><br><div class="plainMail">Hi Douglas,<br>At 06:19 14-05-2009, Douglas Onyango wrote:<br>> Correct, its the four allocations in the exhaustion phase here....because the proposal cuts from the current allocation phase into the Exhaustion phase, the "Additional" word i believe is not misplaced<br><br>I made a mistake when I wrote the question. It should be "Why" instead of "Which". As my question was not answered, I'll ask it again:<br><br>My question is about whether the aggregate
allocation (one + four) will allow equitable distribution of IPv4 addresses among LIRs. To put it differently, how did you reach these numbers?<br><br>Leo and Graham commented on setting the limit for IPv4 address space that can be allocated during the Exhaustion phase. I believe that we are asking similar questions.<br><br>> My definitions contains the following.......<br><br>[snip]<br><br>> (c) New LIRīs A new LIR is defined as being an organization which has recently become a member of AfriNIC but has yet to be assigned or allocated any IPv4 address space.<br><br>It's better not to use "recently"? You are proposing a policy that AfriNIC will have to implement. If the policy is unclear, AfriNIC will have to interpret the intent and that may cause problems.<br><br>I suggest a change to the definitions:<br><br> (b) Existing LIRīs An existing LIR is defined as being an organization
that<br> assigns address space to 'end-users' and who has already been assigned or allocated<br> IPv4 address space by AfriNIC.<br><br> (c) New LIRīs A new LIR is defined as being an organization that assigns address<br> space to 'end-users' and who is a member of AfriNIC but has not been assigned or<br> allocated any IPv4 address space prior to the Exhaustion phase.<br><br>There is a definition for Critical Infrastructure Provider. However, there is no mention of them in the policy. Are they covered by the Soft landing policy?<br><br> "A /16 IPv4 address block will be in reserve out of the last /8 pool. This<br> /16 IPv4 address block shall be preserved by AfriNIC for some future uses,<br> as yet unforeseen."<br><br>I suggest using "reserved" instead of preserved.<br><br>Regards,<br>-sm
<br></div></blockquote></td></tr></table><br>