<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <p>I want to make sure people don't read too much into your
      statement. Clearly, IPv6 has been widely deployed and is in
      production for hundreds of millions of people worldwide.</p>
    <p>[more below]<br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 6/30/19 7:06 AM, Andrew Alston
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DBBPR03MB5415B956FA74727154825D71EEFE0@DBBPR03MB5415.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
        medium)">
      <style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
        {font-family:"Cambria Math";
        panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
        {font-family:Calibri;
        panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
        {font-family:Consolas;
        panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
        {font-family:"Arial Narrow";
        panose-1:2 11 6 6 2 2 2 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
        {margin:0cm;
        margin-bottom:.0001pt;
        font-size:11.0pt;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        color:blue;
        text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        color:purple;
        text-decoration:underline;}
pre
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
        margin:0cm;
        margin-bottom:.0001pt;
        font-size:11.0pt;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
        {mso-style-priority:34;
        margin-top:0cm;
        margin-right:0cm;
        margin-bottom:0cm;
        margin-left:36.0pt;
        margin-bottom:.0001pt;
        font-size:11.0pt;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
        {mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
        mso-style-priority:99;
        mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
        font-family:Consolas;
        mso-fareast-language:#2000;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
        {mso-style-name:msonormal;
        mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
        margin-right:0cm;
        mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
        margin-left:0cm;
        font-size:11.0pt;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.HTMLconformatoprevio, li.HTMLconformatoprevio, div.HTMLconformatoprevio
        {mso-style-name:"HTML con formato previo";
        mso-style-link:"HTML con formato previo Car";
        margin:0cm;
        margin-bottom:.0001pt;
        font-size:11.0pt;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.HTMLconformatoprevioCar
        {mso-style-name:"HTML con formato previo Car";
        mso-style-priority:99;
        mso-style-link:"HTML con formato previo";
        font-family:Consolas;}
span.EmailStyle22
        {mso-style-type:personal;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
        color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle23
        {mso-style-type:personal;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
        color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle24
        {mso-style-type:personal;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
        color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle25
        {mso-style-type:personal;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
        color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle28
        {mso-style-type:personal-reply;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
        color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
        {mso-style-type:export-only;
        font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
        {size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
        margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
        {page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
        {mso-list-id:296223649;
        mso-list-type:hybrid;
        mso-list-template-ids:-2063007972 599163338 536870937 536870939 536870927 536870937 536870939 536870927 536870937 536870939;}
@list l0:level1
        {mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
        mso-level-text:"%1\.\)";
        mso-level-tab-stop:none;
        mso-level-number-position:left;
        text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level2
        {mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
        mso-level-tab-stop:none;
        mso-level-number-position:left;
        text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level3
        {mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
        mso-level-tab-stop:none;
        mso-level-number-position:right;
        text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
        {mso-level-tab-stop:none;
        mso-level-number-position:left;
        text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level5
        {mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
        mso-level-tab-stop:none;
        mso-level-number-position:left;
        text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level6
        {mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
        mso-level-tab-stop:none;
        mso-level-number-position:right;
        text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
        {mso-level-tab-stop:none;
        mso-level-number-position:left;
        text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level8
        {mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
        mso-level-tab-stop:none;
        mso-level-number-position:left;
        text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level9
        {mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
        mso-level-tab-stop:none;
        mso-level-number-position:right;
        text-indent:-9.0pt;}
ol
        {margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
        {margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US">Jordi I think – getting back to the topic at
            hand – the point here is simply that those who are saying
            “just deploy v6” are taking an extremely naïve view.  If we
            want v6 adoption – it is time we as a community start to
            acknowledge the fact that v6 – while it has to happen –
            while it is critical that it happens – and while there are
            no other options because well, v4 is dying and entirely
            insufficient, does not detract from the fact that there are
            still significant problems with v6.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US">Fact is – we’re 20+ years into v6 – and you and
            I, I believe first met in Cairo at the Mena House Oberoi, 14
            years ago – and there were discussions there about the
            perspective of runout with your views contrasted to the
            views of Tony Hain.  My view is – looking back that far –
            the community, and the IETF, has done a horrific job with v6
            – and I blame the vendors, the ietf and the community alike
            for the fact that so far in – as we get to crunch point – we
            still have no feature parity to v4 – nowhere close.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US">I believe that many of the problems with v6
            stem from the fact that – unlike v4 – which was created by a
            very small group in room – v6 was the masses – all of whom
            were trying to inject fixes for every problem they could
            think of into the protocol – and the result was the fact
            that it morphed and became problematic.   Then we started
            trying to see what we could do with it that was new and
            fancy – before addressing the feature parity issues – and
            this does create challenges.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US">Am I saying that anyone should halt on v6? 
            Hell no – I believe that anyone who isn’t yet figuring out
            how to dual stack at minimum – and everywhere – is going to
            be in a world of hurt soon – and is acting contrary to their
            own interests.  But – if we want adoption – we need to start
            being willing to admit that v6 has issues – many many issues
            – which have not been addressed and which people tend to
            want to ignore.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="a">
          <li class="MsoListParagraph"
            style="margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US">There is
              almost no MPLS feature parity when using v6
            </span></li>
        </ol>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <p>Not my expertise, but I know of people who have deployed all of
      the above. I didn't write <a
        href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7439">https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7439</a>
      "Gap Analysis for Operating IPv6-Only MPLS Networks," but I signed
      the paycheck of the guy who did. That was published more than four
      years ago. I haven't kept up with gap resolution, but I believe
      progress has been made on almost all of them.</p>
    <p>Vendor issues are different, of course.<br>
    </p>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DBBPR03MB5415B956FA74727154825D71EEFE0@DBBPR03MB5415.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com">
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="a">
          <li class="MsoListParagraph"
            style="margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span><br>
          </li>
          <li class="MsoListParagraph"
            style="margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US">You have
              header size issues in V6 when using extensions that could
              result in significant costs</span></li>
        </ol>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    Don't parse extension headers unless you expect them and know what
    to do with them, i.e., not on Internet backbone. <br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DBBPR03MB5415B956FA74727154825D71EEFE0@DBBPR03MB5415.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com">
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="a">
          <li class="MsoListParagraph"
            style="margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span><br>
          </li>
          <li class="MsoListParagraph"
            style="margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US">You have
              some very interesting issues with security – particularly
              with extension headers and how they are processed by most
              firewalls today</span></li>
        </ol>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    Don't parse extensions headers (EH) unless you expect them and know
    what to do with them. I agree that the header format is inefficient:
    L4 firewalls have to read a variable-length header to find the upper
    layer header. Some security policies simply discard any packets with
    EH other than fragmentation headers.<br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DBBPR03MB5415B956FA74727154825D71EEFE0@DBBPR03MB5415.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com">
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="a">
          <li class="MsoListParagraph"
            style="margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span><br>
          </li>
          <li class="MsoListParagraph"
            style="margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US">You have
              path mtu issues – and how kernels are dealing with them
              and the ability to create some pretty serious issues with
              some well targeted packets in various operating systems.</span></li>
        </ol>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    Can you be more specific? Path MTU is problematic when you have
    tunnels that change the effective MTU size along the path, and there
    are some oddball cases of very long (1600+ byte) UDP packets, but a
    moderate MTU on servers cures most ills.<br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DBBPR03MB5415B956FA74727154825D71EEFE0@DBBPR03MB5415.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com">
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="a">
          <li class="MsoListParagraph"
            style="margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span><br>
          </li>
          <li class="MsoListParagraph"
            style="margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US">You have
              major issues with parity in many of the firewalls when it
              comes to v6</span></li>
        </ol>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    Do you mean processing in hardware vs software, or the kind of
    inspection available? The first problem is generally that you have
    an old firewall that's probably due to retire. <br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DBBPR03MB5415B956FA74727154825D71EEFE0@DBBPR03MB5415.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com">
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="a">
          <li class="MsoListParagraph"
            style="margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span><br>
          </li>
          <li class="MsoListParagraph"
            style="margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US">You have
              DPI issues with v6 – which while I don’t like DPI because
              of the consequences to net neutrality – create problems –
              are still a constraint on the market – particularly in
              Africa</span></li>
        </ol>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    What issues? Is this back to extension headers being hard to parse?
    With TLS1.3 and QUIC (HTTP/3) DPI will be limited to metadata
    anyway. <br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DBBPR03MB5415B956FA74727154825D71EEFE0@DBBPR03MB5415.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com">
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="a">
          <li class="MsoListParagraph"
            style="margin-left:0cm;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span><br>
          </li>
        </ol>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US">So – Let’s accept that we need v6 – we have to
            do it – but lets also stop saying – v6 is perfect and
            everyone can just turn it on – and I’m not saying you are
            saying that at all – but I see enough of that on this list
            to realize that people often don’t truly understand the
            challenges – and the way to fix those challenges – is
            through acknowledgement, dialog and conversation, not
            sticking our heads in the sand</span></p>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <p>I don't think I can be called naive. I also don't think anyone
      has said the words you say people need to stop saying. If you want
      protocol changes, that conversation should happen at the IETF,
      which I understand you're doing with SRv6.<br>
    </p>
    <p>Most importantly, I don't want people to take the gist of your
      message and think IPv6 is not ready for deployment. You may have
      specific issues in your network - I certainly can't say you don't
      - but large and small network operators around the world have
      managed to deploy IPv6 already. <br>
    </p>
    <p>Hardware and vendor challenges exist in IPv4, too, and for many
      network operators, once they're over the initial hurdle of
      thinking about IPv6, the network becomes simpler in IPv6 than in
      IPv4.</p>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <p>Lee<br>
    </p>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DBBPR03MB5415B956FA74727154825D71EEFE0@DBBPR03MB5415.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com">
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US">Andrew<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="en-KE"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <div>
          <div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
            1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
            <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span
                lang="EN-US"> JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD
                <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"><rpd@afrinic.net></a>
                <br>
                <b>Sent:</b> Sunday, 30 June 2019 13:46<br>
                <b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
                <b>Subject:</b> Re: [rpd] inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR
                policy proposals - AFRINIC needs this policy now!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US">Hi Andrew,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US">Good summary in the article. Not saying that I
            disagree with you, just my view according to the last call
            just passed the 6man segment routing header document.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span
              style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span
              style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">Regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
              style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
              lang="EN-US">Jordi<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
              style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
              lang="EN-US">@jordipalet<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
              style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
              lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
                lang="ES">El 29/6/19 16:03, "Andrew Alston" <<a
                  href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
                  moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>>
                escribió:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
        </div>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
              lang="ES"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span lang="ES">Jordi,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span lang="ES">Just
            a note on SRv6 – yes – the IETF did certain things with SRv6
            recently – but the debate is far from over – because SRv6 as
            defined by the original SR draft has major problems – and
            there are at least two more RFC’s coming – interestingly
            enough they do things very differently.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span lang="ES"><a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/srv6-why-we-want-andrew-alston/"
              moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/srv6-why-we-want-andrew-alston/</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span lang="ES">That
            lists 4 of the current drafts – another one I’m expecting
            out in the next few days – edits are done for initial
            submission so just waiting for publication.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span lang="ES">Thanks<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span lang="ES">Andrew<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
          1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><b><span
                style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black" lang="ES">From:
              </span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black"
              lang="ES">JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <<a
                href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es"
                moz-do-not-send="true">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a>><br>
              <b>Date: </b>Saturday, 29 June 2019 at 14:59<br>
              <b>To: </b>Andrew Alston <<a
                href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
                moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>>,
              Nasir Faruk <<a href="mailto:nasirfaruk@gmail.com"
                moz-do-not-send="true">nasirfaruk@gmail.com</a>>, "<a
                href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>"
              <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
              <b>Subject: </b>Re: [rpd] inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR policy
              proposals - AFRINIC needs this policy now!</span><span
              lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        </div>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
              lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES">Hi Andrew,</span><span
            lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES"> </span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES">Some responses below,
            in-line.</span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
              style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black" lang="ES"> </span><span
              lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
              style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black" lang="ES">Regards,</span><span
              lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:35.4pt"><span
              style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black" lang="ES">Jordi</span><span
              lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:35.4pt"><span
              style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black" lang="ES">@jordipalet</span><span
              lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:35.4pt"><span
              style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black" lang="ES"> </span><span
              lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES"> </span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES"> </span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span
                lang="ES">El 29/6/19 12:55, "Andrew Alston" <<a
                  href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
                  moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>>
                escribió:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
        </div>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span
              lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES">So,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES">There
            are a few things here that we also need to consider.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES">Let’s
            start with the mass IPv6 deployment.  To be frank, deploying
            IPv6 to the edge to the customers – is only one part of it. 
            There are other fairly major stumbling blocks – in
            particular – V6 in an MPLS environment right now is still a
            bit of a mess – LDPv6 was basically still born – and in both
            the cases of Cisco and Juniper, you currently cannot a.) Do
            V6 Martini b.) V6 L3VPN still has huge ties back to V4 (why,
            heaven only knows) c.) There is massive inconsistently about
            the forward movement of V6 in various domains – to give you
            an idea – Cisco on IOS-XE does not implement SR-MPLS TLV’s
            in IS-IS at current, neither does Huawei – and there is very
            little clarification on if they are going to – or if they
            are going to chase the SRv6 train – and in the matter case –
            where we end up with SRv6 is still a mystery – because there
            are two very divided schools of thought on SRv6 (and it
            concerns header overhead on packets) .  So – this whole
            “simply mass deploy v6” argument – is actually a fair bit
            more complex for many people than many would like you to
            believe.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES">In general, I think I
            agree, and possibly the path forward will be SRv6, which
            possibly will take around 1 year to be generally available
            in equipment. IETF just passed it, so it is up to vendors to
            decide in what hardware will be supported. Several of them
            already have betas running and even some big deployment.</span><span
            lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES"> </span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES">However, if you have
            “some” business customers, possibly you want to keep
            dual-stack in most of your core network. I’m referring to
            the “big customers”, that have their own IPv4 PI (maybe PA,
            but because the scarcity, and because the need to have IPv6
            PI if they are multihomed, I think they should also have
            IPv4 PA) and need transit in dual-stack, because they are
            having some “dual-stack” services in their own networks.
            This will decrease with the increase of Cloud Services, of
            course.</span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES"> </span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES">Business customers that
            don’t need to “host” in their own network services, can be
            very well served with 464XLAT, the same as residential ones.
            This may be also approached with SD-WAN solutions and
            combinations of both.</span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES"> </span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES">Yes
            – it can be done – but its not the simple put some addresses
            on there and let it run that people make out.  Not to
            mention the transition mechanisms to do V6 -> V4
            translation are to be blunt, a mess, there are what, 20+ of
            them?  Again – it can be done, but it aint exactly quick and
            easy – and this is my major problem with this whole argument
            of “just use v6”<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES"> </span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES">Forget about all them,
            IPv6-only with IPv4-as-a-Serive is the only realistic
            approach. 464XLAT is the way, especially if you also have
            cellular network and don’t want to get 2 transitions
            mechanisms (for example 464XLAT and MAP-T/E or lw4o6).</span><span
            lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES"> </span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES">Reference: RFC8585 and
            draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-deployment (last-call ended 2 days
            ago, so soon also an RFC).</span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES">Secondly,
            regards to the comments about the bylaws and IP space – let
            me be clear – no one owns an integer – IP addresses are not
            assets.  When you buy space, or sell space, you are not
            selling the space, you are charging someone for the process
            of transferring your right to use said numbers from you to
            them.  Even then, I would argue that IP space and the usage
            thereof, is built on a trust based system.  There is no
            legislation anywhere that I know of that allows anyone to
            lay claim to an integer – and if I’m wrong here, please,
            correct me, because as far as I know, there simply isn’t any
            case law on this (anywhere)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES">As
            such, I don’t think we can bring arguments about assets into
            the IP space debate in the context of the bylaws.  What you
            get as a member of an RIR – and what you are paying for – is
            a book keeping entry – to say “We believe that you have the
            right to use this number and we’re telling the world we
            think it should be you using it”, you are NOT paying for IP
            space, you are NOT paying to have sole claim to that IP
            space – you are paying for a journal entry – nothing more.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            style="font-size:12.0pt" lang="ES">Fully agree here!</span><span
            lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES">Thanks<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES">Andrew<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><b><span
              lang="ES">From:</span></b><span lang="ES"> Nasir Faruk
            <<a href="mailto:nasirfaruk@gmail.com"
              moz-do-not-send="true">nasirfaruk@gmail.com</a>>
            <br>
            <b>Sent:</b> Saturday, 29 June 2019 12:30<br>
            <b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
              moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
            <b>Subject:</b> Re: [rpd] inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR policy
            proposals - AFRINIC needs this policy now!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span
                lang="ES">Hello Lee,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span
                lang="ES">Thanks for the well thought document. It has
                given considerable numbers needed to support this
                argument. I think one concern of Noah not addressed on
                the paper was the statistics of estimated IP address
                that may flow to AFRINIC when the policy take up. This
                is a number that would be somehow difficult to provide
                because it depends on the demand and supply chain.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span
                lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:70.8pt;line-height:115%"><span
                lang="ES">@Noah,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:70.8pt;line-height:115%"><span
                lang="ES">It is great the fact that you have admitted
                from Lee’s submission that Africa would need address
                space most. However, I can see that your stand is
                basically revolving around option A, which I called
                massive IPv6 deployment.
                <o:p></o:p></span></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:70.8pt;line-height:115%"><span
                lang="ES">Now, do you honestly think in Africa, the IPv6
                deployment will be at the advanced stage before AFRINIC
                runs out of IPv4 spaces? What is your confidence level,
                give me some numbers!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:70.8pt;line-height:115%"><span
                lang="ES"> Then supporting one-direction transfers to
                only Afrinic to me would not be an option if other RIRs
                constrained to bi-directional flows. I dont think its
                wise to think other regions would change their policies
                to agree in one-direction transfers to Afrinic. Why
                would they do such?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:70.8pt;line-height:115%"><span
                lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:70.8pt;line-height:115%"><span
                lang="ES">Best Regards.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:70.8pt;line-height:115%"><span
                lang="ES">Faruk<o:p></o:p></span></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:10.0pt;margin-left:70.8pt;line-height:115%"><span
                lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
          <div>
            <div>
              <div>
                <div>
                  <div>
                    <div>
                      <div>
                        <div>
                          <div>
                            <div>
                              <div>
                                <div>
                                  <div>
                                    <div>
                                      <p class="MsoNormal"
                                        style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span
                                          lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
                                      <pre style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black" lang="ES">..............................................................................................</span><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue" lang="ES">............</span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
                                      <pre style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"" lang="ES"> </span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
                                      <p
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:106.8pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify"><i><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial
                                            Narrow",sans-serif;color:#111111"
                                            lang="ES"> </span></i><span
                                          lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
                                      <pre style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif" lang="ES"> </span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
                                      <pre style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif" lang="ES"> </span><span lang="ES"><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
                                    </div>
                                  </div>
                                </div>
                              </div>
                            </div>
                          </div>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </div>
                </div>
              </div>
            </div>
            <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span
                lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span
              lang="ES"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <div>
            <div>
              <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span
                  lang="ES">On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 3:59 AM <<a
                    href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a>>
                  wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
            </div>
            <blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
              1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
              <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span
                  lang="ES">Send RPD mailing list submissions to<br>
                          <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
                  <br>
                  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
                  visit<br>
                          <a
                    href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
                    https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
                  or, via email, send a message with subject or body
                  'help' to<br>
                          <a href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a><br>
                  <br>
                  You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
                          <a href="mailto:rpd-owner@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd-owner@afrinic.net</a><br>
                  <br>
                  When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is
                  more specific<br>
                  than "Re: Contents of RPD digest..."<br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  Today's Topics:<br>
                  <br>
                     1. Re: inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR policy proposals -
                  AFRINIC needs<br>
                        this policy now! (Ronald F. Guilmette)<br>
                     2. Re: inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR policy proposals -
                  AFRINIC needs<br>
                        this policy now! (JORDI PALET MARTINEZ)<br>
                     3. Re: inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR policy proposals -
                  AFRINIC needs<br>
                        this policy now! (Ronald F. Guilmette)<br>
                     4. Re: inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR policy proposals -
                  AFRINIC needs<br>
                        this policy now! (Owen DeLong)<br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
                  <br>
                  Message: 1<br>
                  Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:09:16 -0700<br>
                  From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <<a
                    href="mailto:rfg@tristatelogic.com" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">rfg@tristatelogic.com</a>><br>
                  To: RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
                  Subject: Re: [rpd] inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR policy
                  proposals - AFRINIC<br>
                          needs   this policy now!<br>
                  Message-ID: <<a
                    href="mailto:80104.1561759756@segfault.tristatelogic.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">80104.1561759756@segfault.tristatelogic.com</a>><br>
                  Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
                  <br>
                  Ladies and gentlemen,<br>
                  <br>
                  I must begin by saying that I have two apologies to
                  make to you all.<br>
                  <br>
                  The first, which I will need to post at a later time,
                  is for my prior bad<br>
                  behavior and unfairly imflamitory and prejuducial
                  comments made on this<br>
                  list some several years ago now.  I was utterly wrong
                  in my comments<br>
                  and assumptions on that occasion, and have been
                  meaning to come here and<br>
                  post a lengthy apology every since... a task that, for
                  one reason or<br>
                  another, has gotten put in the back burner all this
                  time.<br>
                  <br>
                  I don't even have time to go into my past mistakes or
                  the reasons for them<br>
                  just now, so that will have to wait, and I will post a
                  more elaborate and<br>
                  detailed apology for my past rude comments, hopefully
                  in the very near<br>
                  future.  (Perhaps nobody even remembers or cares
                  anymore what I bad<br>
                  things I said here long ago, especially given what
                  seems to have been<br>
                  some dramatically woser behavior here recently.  But
                  it is a matter of<br>
                  honor and I need to set the record straight and
                  apologize properly,<br>
                  but with an explanation.)<br>
                  <br>
                  My second apology is for coming in late to this
                  discussion about the<br>
                  pending Inter-RIR policy proposal(s).  I am only now
                  becoming aware of<br>
                  this and I confess that I haven't had time to study or
                  even think about<br>
                  either the proposal or its implications or the stated
                  postions of various<br>
                  members on the proposal(s).  Nontheless, I feel
                  compelled to interject<br>
                  myself just for the purpose of asking a few very naive
                  questions...<br>
                  <br>
                  My starting point is Mr. Noah's recent posting on this
                  topic...<br>
                  <br>
                  In message <<a
href="mailto:CAEqgTWYPEMDHoVonhaNTTY5p6%2BShVsOymaVVrz4ShKf8oju%2BvQ@mail.gmail.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">CAEqgTWYPEMDHoVonhaNTTY5p6+ShVsOymaVVrz4ShKf8oju+vQ@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
                  Noah <<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">noah@neo.co.tz</a>>
                  wrote:<br>
                  <br>
                  >So Jordi,<br>
                  ><br>
                  >I still oppose this policy with strongest terms
                  possible. I still believe<br>
                  >IPv4 space will leave our region so fast when
                  holders of Idle space who are<br>
                  >yet to put them to good use as was
                  allocated/assigned will trade them for<br>
                  >some dollars rather than return them to AfriNIC.
                  What we need is a policy<br>
                  >that would discourage IPv4 from being transferred
                  out of the region because<br>
                  >of attractive prices of IPv$ but rather encourage
                  more space coming into<br>
                  >the region.<br>
                  <br>
                  For whatever it is worth, I personally am totally torn
                  on this issue.  On<br>
                  the one hand, I would like to support my friend Jordi,
                  and I do, certainly,<br>
                  with respect to his anti-hijacking proposal, but
                  perhaps not in the<br>
                  case of Inter-RIR transfers.  Also, as a longtime
                  fighter against spam<br>
                  on the Internet, it is an has been my belief that if
                  all IPv4 space were<br>
                  transfered, tomorrow, to whomever was the highest
                  bidder, without any<br>
                  regard for any other consideration (e.g. geography)
                  then this alone would<br>
                  put a major and perhaps crippling dent in the practice
                  of so-called<br>
                  "snowshoe" spamming... a practice that requires a LOT
                  of very cheap IPv4<br>
                  address space.<br>
                  <br>
                  That all having been said, I am also quite sympathetic
                  to the postion<br>
                  elaborated by Mr. Noah, and I could even be easily
                  induced to begin<br>
                  chanting "Afrinic for Africans!"  (And I say this even
                  though I myself<br>
                  am not an African, either by residence or birth.)<br>
                  <br>
                  At the formation, Afrinic was endowed with a great
                  deal of IPv4 address<br>
                  space, and I believe that it was everyone's
                  understanding, at that time,<br>
                  that all these resources would be used for the good of
                  Africans.  Much<br>
                  has transpired since that time, the Internet itself
                  has changed dramatically,<br>
                  and an open market for IPv4 address space has now
                  evolved.  But despite<br>
                  all that, it can be, and perhaps should be argued that
                  the fundamental<br>
                  principal should still survive, and that Afrinic space
                  should be used to<br>
                  the benefit of Africans, and not just as an object of
                  trade, i.e. to derive<br>
                  a one-time cash transfer to current or historical
                  holders of these resources.<br>
                  <br>
                  But I didn't come here to make speeches.<br>
                  <br>
                  I said above that I would have a few naive questions,
                  and I do.  Now I<br>
                  finally come to those.  Mostly my questions derive
                  from the fundamental<br>
                  charter of Afrinic, which is to say its bylaws:<br>
                  <br>
                      <a href="https://afrinic.net/bylaws"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
                    https://afrinic.net/bylaws</a><br>
                  <br>
                  Here are my two questions:<br>
                  <br>
                     *) Section 3.2 of the Bylaws reads as follows:<br>
                  <br>
                         3.2 The income and the capital of the Company
                  shall be applied<br>
                         solely towards the promotion of the objects of
                  the Company; and<br>
                         no part of the income or capital shall be paid
                  or transferred,<br>
                         directly or indirectly, to the members, whether
                  by way of dividend,<br>
                         capital distribution or bonus or otherwise.<br>
                  <br>
                     I wonder if anyone has considered, or reconsidered
                  the implications,<br>
                     legal and otherwise, of this (historical?) section
                  of the bylaws,<br>
                     particularly now that IPv4 address blocks may be,
                  and quite certainly<br>
                     are being treated, by major accounting firms, as
                  part of the capital<br>
                     assets of the various companies, worldwide, i.e.
                  all those that<br>
                     currently buy, sell, trade, and "own" them.<br>
                  <br>
                     That's my question.  Does Section 3.2 of the Bylaws
                  prohibit Afrinic<br>
                     from "transferring" IP address blocks to any party
                  AT ALL?  (Remember,<br>
                     I did warn you all above that my questions would be
                  naive!)<br>
                  <br>
                     *) Section 6.1 of the Bylaws reds as follows:<br>
                  <br>
                         6.1 Membership shall be open to:<br>
                  <br>
                        (i) any Person who is geographically based
                  within, and providing<br>
                        services in the African region, and who is
                  engaged in the use of,<br>
                        or business of providing, open system protocol
                  network services; or<br>
                  <br>
                        (ii) any other Person who is approved by the
                  Board or the members.<br>
                  <br>
                     I must and do apologize for my abundant ignorance,
                  but I really am at<br>
                     a loss to understand the implications, if any, of
                  the above quoted<br>
                     section of the Bylaws, particularly with respect to
                  IP address<br>
                     resources.<br>
                  <br>
                     If anyone would be so kind as to clarify for me
                  whether or not Section<br>
                     6.1 of the Bylaws have any specific implications
                  with respect to IP<br>
                     address resources, I sure would appreciate it.<br>
                  <br>
                  Those are the only two questions I have for now.  I
                  look forward to being<br>
                  enlightened regarding the above two points.<br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  Regards,<br>
                  rfg<br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  ------------------------------<br>
                  <br>
                  Message: 2<br>
                  Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 00:24:53 +0200<br>
                  From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <<a
                    href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a>><br>
                  To: RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
                  Subject: Re: [rpd] inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR policy
                  proposals - AFRINIC<br>
                          needs this policy now!<br>
                  Message-ID: <<a
                    href="mailto:47B9CD44-F769-42F7-B7A6-9FF70E00540D@consulintel.es"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">47B9CD44-F769-42F7-B7A6-9FF70E00540D@consulintel.es</a>><br>
                  Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="UTF-8"<br>
                  <br>
                  Hi Ronald,<br>
                  <br>
                  I think the misconception here is to believe that we
                  are "actually" talking about the addresses as a
                  "transferable" object.<br>
                  <br>
                  By definition, the addresses aren't from the ISP that
                  gets them.<br>
                  <br>
                  What we are transferring is the right to get the
                  addresses registered for the exclusive use of the
                  resource-holder, so that organization can use those
                  addresses (for its own network or customers).<br>
                  <br>
                  In fact, we could say that the RIRs are also NOT the
                  owners of the addresses, just the responsible of the
                  registration services and distribution of the "rights
                  to use them" for the community.<br>
                  <br>
                  I think that may clarify your points?<br>
                  <br>
                  And by the way, if you were right, then I'm sure we
                  will have a problem in *every* RIR with all the
                  transfer policies, and I guess sufficient lawyers have
                  already looked into that!<br>
                  <br>
                  Regards,<br>
                  Jordi<br>
                  @jordipalet<br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  ?El 29/6/19 0:15, "Ronald F. Guilmette" <<a
                    href="mailto:rfg@tristatelogic.com" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">rfg@tristatelogic.com</a>>
                  escribi?:<br>
                  <br>
                      Ladies and gentlemen,<br>
                  <br>
                      I must begin by saying that I have two apologies
                  to make to you all.<br>
                  <br>
                      The first, which I will need to post at a later
                  time, is for my prior bad<br>
                      behavior and unfairly imflamitory and prejuducial
                  comments made on this<br>
                      list some several years ago now.  I was utterly
                  wrong in my comments<br>
                      and assumptions on that occasion, and have been
                  meaning to come here and<br>
                      post a lengthy apology every since... a task that,
                  for one reason or<br>
                      another, has gotten put in the back burner all
                  this time.<br>
                  <br>
                      I don't even have time to go into my past mistakes
                  or the reasons for them<br>
                      just now, so that will have to wait, and I will
                  post a more elaborate and<br>
                      detailed apology for my past rude comments,
                  hopefully in the very near<br>
                      future.  (Perhaps nobody even remembers or cares
                  anymore what I bad<br>
                      things I said here long ago, especially given what
                  seems to have been<br>
                      some dramatically woser behavior here recently. 
                  But it is a matter of<br>
                      honor and I need to set the record straight and
                  apologize properly,<br>
                      but with an explanation.)<br>
                  <br>
                      My second apology is for coming in late to this
                  discussion about the<br>
                      pending Inter-RIR policy proposal(s).  I am only
                  now becoming aware of<br>
                      this and I confess that I haven't had time to
                  study or even think about<br>
                      either the proposal or its implications or the
                  stated postions of various<br>
                      members on the proposal(s).  Nontheless, I feel
                  compelled to interject<br>
                      myself just for the purpose of asking a few very
                  naive questions...<br>
                  <br>
                      My starting point is Mr. Noah's recent posting on
                  this topic...<br>
                  <br>
                      In message <<a
href="mailto:CAEqgTWYPEMDHoVonhaNTTY5p6%2BShVsOymaVVrz4ShKf8oju%2BvQ@mail.gmail.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">CAEqgTWYPEMDHoVonhaNTTY5p6+ShVsOymaVVrz4ShKf8oju+vQ@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
                      Noah <<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">noah@neo.co.tz</a>>
                  wrote:<br>
                  <br>
                      >So Jordi,<br>
                      ><br>
                      >I still oppose this policy with strongest
                  terms possible. I still believe<br>
                      >IPv4 space will leave our region so fast when
                  holders of Idle space who are<br>
                      >yet to put them to good use as was
                  allocated/assigned will trade them for<br>
                      >some dollars rather than return them to
                  AfriNIC. What we need is a policy<br>
                      >that would discourage IPv4 from being
                  transferred out of the region because<br>
                      >of attractive prices of IPv$ but rather
                  encourage more space coming into<br>
                      >the region.<br>
                  <br>
                      For whatever it is worth, I personally am totally
                  torn on this issue.  On<br>
                      the one hand, I would like to support my friend
                  Jordi, and I do, certainly,<br>
                      with respect to his anti-hijacking proposal, but
                  perhaps not in the<br>
                      case of Inter-RIR transfers.  Also, as a longtime
                  fighter against spam<br>
                      on the Internet, it is an has been my belief that
                  if all IPv4 space were<br>
                      transfered, tomorrow, to whomever was the highest
                  bidder, without any<br>
                      regard for any other consideration (e.g.
                  geography) then this alone would<br>
                      put a major and perhaps crippling dent in the
                  practice of so-called<br>
                      "snowshoe" spamming... a practice that requires a
                  LOT of very cheap IPv4<br>
                      address space.<br>
                  <br>
                      That all having been said, I am also quite
                  sympathetic to the postion<br>
                      elaborated by Mr. Noah, and I could even be easily
                  induced to begin<br>
                      chanting "Afrinic for Africans!"  (And I say this
                  even though I myself<br>
                      am not an African, either by residence or birth.)<br>
                  <br>
                      At the formation, Afrinic was endowed with a great
                  deal of IPv4 address<br>
                      space, and I believe that it was everyone's
                  understanding, at that time,<br>
                      that all these resources would be used for the
                  good of Africans.  Much<br>
                      has transpired since that time, the Internet
                  itself has changed dramatically,<br>
                      and an open market for IPv4 address space has now
                  evolved.  But despite<br>
                      all that, it can be, and perhaps should be argued
                  that the fundamental<br>
                      principal should still survive, and that Afrinic
                  space should be used to<br>
                      the benefit of Africans, and not just as an object
                  of trade, i.e. to derive<br>
                      a one-time cash transfer to current or historical
                  holders of these resources.<br>
                  <br>
                      But I didn't come here to make speeches.<br>
                  <br>
                      I said above that I would have a few naive
                  questions, and I do.  Now I<br>
                      finally come to those.  Mostly my questions derive
                  from the fundamental<br>
                      charter of Afrinic, which is to say its bylaws:<br>
                  <br>
                          <a href="https://afrinic.net/bylaws"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
                    https://afrinic.net/bylaws</a><br>
                  <br>
                      Here are my two questions:<br>
                  <br>
                         *) Section 3.2 of the Bylaws reads as follows:<br>
                  <br>
                             3.2 The income and the capital of the
                  Company shall be applied<br>
                             solely towards the promotion of the objects
                  of the Company; and<br>
                             no part of the income or capital shall be
                  paid or transferred,<br>
                             directly or indirectly, to the members,
                  whether by way of dividend,<br>
                             capital distribution or bonus or otherwise.<br>
                  <br>
                         I wonder if anyone has considered, or
                  reconsidered the implications,<br>
                         legal and otherwise, of this (historical?)
                  section of the bylaws,<br>
                         particularly now that IPv4 address blocks may
                  be, and quite certainly<br>
                         are being treated, by major accounting firms,
                  as part of the capital<br>
                         assets of the various companies, worldwide,
                  i.e. all those that<br>
                         currently buy, sell, trade, and "own" them.<br>
                  <br>
                         That's my question.  Does Section 3.2 of the
                  Bylaws prohibit Afrinic<br>
                         from "transferring" IP address blocks to any
                  party AT ALL?  (Remember,<br>
                         I did warn you all above that my questions
                  would be naive!)<br>
                  <br>
                         *) Section 6.1 of the Bylaws reds as follows:<br>
                  <br>
                             6.1 Membership shall be open to:<br>
                  <br>
                            (i) any Person who is geographically based
                  within, and providing<br>
                            services in the African region, and who is
                  engaged in the use of,<br>
                            or business of providing, open system
                  protocol network services; or<br>
                  <br>
                            (ii) any other Person who is approved by the
                  Board or the members.<br>
                  <br>
                         I must and do apologize for my abundant
                  ignorance, but I really am at<br>
                         a loss to understand the implications, if any,
                  of the above quoted<br>
                         section of the Bylaws, particularly with
                  respect to IP address<br>
                         resources.<br>
                  <br>
                         If anyone would be so kind as to clarify for me
                  whether or not Section<br>
                         6.1 of the Bylaws have any specific
                  implications with respect to IP<br>
                         address resources, I sure would appreciate it.<br>
                  <br>
                      Those are the only two questions I have for now. 
                  I look forward to being<br>
                      enlightened regarding the above two points.<br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                      Regards,<br>
                      rfg<br>
                  <br>
                      _______________________________________________<br>
                      RPD mailing list<br>
                      <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
                      <a
                    href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
                    https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  **********************************************<br>
                  IPv4 is over<br>
                  Are you ready for the new Internet ?<br>
                  <a href="http://www.theipv6company.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.theipv6company.com</a><br>
                  The IPv6 Company<br>
                  <br>
                  This electronic message contains information which may
                  be privileged or confidential. The information is
                  intended to be for the exclusive use of the
                  individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty
                  authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of
                  the contents of this information, even if partially,
                  including attached files, is strictly prohibited and
                  will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not
                  the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure,
                  copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
                  information, even if partially, including attached
                  files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a
                  criminal offense, so you must reply to the original
                  sender to inform about this communication and delete
                  it.<br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  ------------------------------<br>
                  <br>
                  Message: 3<br>
                  Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:58:55 -0700<br>
                  From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <<a
                    href="mailto:rfg@tristatelogic.com" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">rfg@tristatelogic.com</a>><br>
                  Cc: RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
                  Subject: Re: [rpd] inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR policy
                  proposals - AFRINIC<br>
                          needs   this policy now!<br>
                  Message-ID: <<a
                    href="mailto:80420.1561762735@segfault.tristatelogic.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">80420.1561762735@segfault.tristatelogic.com</a>><br>
                  Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
                  <br>
                  In message <<a
                    href="mailto:47B9CD44-F769-42F7-B7A6-9FF70E00540D@consulintel.es"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">47B9CD44-F769-42F7-B7A6-9FF70E00540D@consulintel.es</a>>,
                  <br>
                  JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <<a
                    href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a>>
                  wrote:<br>
                  <br>
                  >I think that may clarify your points?<br>
                  <br>
                  Not really.  But thanks for trying.<br>
                  <br>
                  I raised two points, one of them arguably silly, and
                  the other one<br>
                  arguably less so.<br>
                  <br>
                  My first point was that the plain language of Section
                  3.2 of the Bylaws<br>
                  could be construed to disable Afrinic's ablity to
                  "transfer" any kind of<br>
                  "asset" to any party.  And if "asset" were, in this
                  context, construed<br>
                  broadly, then that would result in the arguably
                  remarkable outcome that<br>
                  Afrinic could not "transfer" any IP address resources
                  to any party.<br>
                  <br>
                  Words have meaning, and not just to lawyers, but also
                  to statesmen and<br>
                  to those debating policy decisions.  So my hope is
                  that Section 3.2 of<br>
                  the Bylaws may at some point be formally clarified so
                  as to remove any<br>
                  ambiguity.<br>
                  <br>
                  My second point was about Section 6.1 of the Bylaws
                  which, on the face<br>
                  of it, contains a geographically-limited
                  residence/service requirement.<br>
                  <br>
                  I want to know if that Section still has any current
                  meaning, and if so,<br>
                  what that meaning is.<br>
                  <br>
                  I do not assme that just because it is written in the
                  Bylaws that this<br>
                  section has any actual current operative meaning.  It
                  may perhaps not.<br>
                  I am just asking the question.  (In the fundamental
                  Constitution, as<br>
                  amended, of my own home nation, there appear the words
                  "A well regulated<br>
                  Militia...", however over time, that specific phrase
                  has been adjudicated<br>
                  to have essentially no meaning whatsoever, and thus,
                  no practical<br>
                  implications whatsoever.  It may perhaps be likewise
                  for Section 6.1<br>
                  of the Afrinic Bylaws.)<br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  Regards,<br>
                  rfg<br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  ------------------------------<br>
                  <br>
                  Message: 4<br>
                  Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 19:58:03 -0700<br>
                  From: Owen DeLong <<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">owen@delong.com</a>><br>
                  To: Noah <<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">noah@neo.co.tz</a>><br>
                  Cc: RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
                  Subject: Re: [rpd] inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR policy
                  proposals - AFRINIC<br>
                          needs this policy now!<br>
                  Message-ID: <<a
                    href="mailto:030F0F9B-29C0-4DF2-9147-94E1B2072385@delong.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">030F0F9B-29C0-4DF2-9147-94E1B2072385@delong.com</a>><br>
                  Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  > On Jun 28, 2019, at 10:46 , Noah <<a
                    href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">noah@neo.co.tz</a>> wrote:<br>
                  > <br>
                  > <br>
                  > <br>
                  > <br>
                  > <br>
                  > <br>
                  > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 5:47 PM Andrew Alston
                  <<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>
                  <mailto:<a
                    href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>>>
                  wrote:<br>
                  > Yes Noah, you are right, people don?t play with
                  money.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Ooh yes and in the face of some $ and idle space,
                  the idle space will go in exchange for some $ and this
                  is simple economics. Space is obtained for one reason.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > And quite frankly ? I?d rather stick to this
                  continent ? rather than being forced to take space in
                  an alternative region with another RIR because I?m
                  going to have to buy in space one of these days ? and
                  guess what ? the space in Africa ? at the rates we?re
                  using it ? doesn?t exist ? it does however exist
                  outside. <br>
                  > <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Then we don't need reciprocal but rather one
                  direction (into Africa).  By the way, do we honestly
                  believe that all allocated/assigned space within
                  Africa has been put to good use? Because save for
                  ISP's and content folks who assign space on a daily
                  basis to enterprise customers, most of the other
                  AfriNIC resource members are heavily using NAT with
                  half of the space being under utilized. That space
                  will flow out quick if there is a market for it.<br>
                  <br>
                  Actually, as it stands in most of the other RIRs, you
                  do need reciprocal because if your policy is
                  non-reciprocal, their policies won?t allow the space
                  to flow into your region.<br>
                  <br>
                  This isn?t about trying to exploit addresses from
                  Africa, it?s about the concept of fairness. Even
                  China?s NIR eventually recognized that the one-way
                  policy was preventing them from obtaining resources
                  and switched to a bidirectional transfer policy. Since
                  then, they remain a net importer of addresses.<br>
                  <br>
                  > So you can force guys like myself to go buy it
                  through a ripe membership, or you can let me bring the
                  space onto the continent.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I would not say force but I would rather
                  encourage you who is a member of both AfriNIC and RIPE
                  (available space), to actually consider getting some
                  from RIPE for some use in Africa.
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  Why would you want him exporting money to RIPE rather
                  than paying fees to AfriNIC for the same space?<br>
                  <br>
                  If you have the transfer policy, he gets the space
                  from a RIPE member and brings it into AfriNIC for
                  administration and pays fees to AfriNIC.<br>
                  If you don?t have a transfer policy, he gets the space
                  from RIPE, keeps his space in RIPE and all his fees go
                  too RIPE.<br>
                  <br>
                  What am I missing, Noah?<br>
                  <br>
                  Owen<br>
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Andrew<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > From: Noah <<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">noah@neo.co.tz</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">noah@neo.co.tz</a>>>
                  <br>
                  > Sent: Friday, 28 June 2019 16:30<br>
                  > To: Andrew Alston <<a
                    href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>
                  <mailto:<a
                    href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>>><br>
                  > Cc: Boubakar Barry <<a
                    href="mailto:boubakarbarry@gmail.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">boubakarbarry@gmail.com</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:boubakarbarry@gmail.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">boubakarbarry@gmail.com</a>>>;
                  JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <<a
                    href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a>>>;
                  RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>>><br>
                  > Subject: Re: [rpd] inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR
                  policy proposals - AFRINIC needs this policy now!<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 4:17 PM Andrew Alston
                  <<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>
                  <mailto:<a
                    href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>>>
                  wrote:<br>
                  > <br>
                  > Are you not asking for the identical thing?<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > You have absolutely zero empirical data about how
                  much space will supposedly flow off the continent ?
                  and I strongly dispute that it will ? because I don?t
                  believe there is enough of it on the continent as it
                  is to even serve current needs.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > We?re being asked to refuse support for as policy
                  based on fear mongering that has no evidence to
                  support said fears<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > There is historical evidence to show that other
                  resources (non-INR) have left the continent to the
                  benefit of other regions but Africa. Show them the $$$
                  and they will dance.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I had a very interesting discussion with one of
                  the IPv$ brokers and and he surely cant wait to trade
                  some of the space in our region. I will not go into
                  the details of that discussion but it was enough for
                  me to personally stay firm to my opposition of any
                  policy that would open room for resources meant to be
                  used in our region being traded fast due to economic
                  reasons beyond the real purpose they were meant for
                  which is to help build the African Internet
                  Infrastructure.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > You think its fear mongering, but I can assure
                  you that money is money and people dont play around
                  when it comes to money.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Noah<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Andrew<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > From: Boubakar Barry <<a
                    href="mailto:boubakarbarry@gmail.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">boubakarbarry@gmail.com</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:boubakarbarry@gmail.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">boubakarbarry@gmail.com</a>>>
                  <br>
                  > Sent: Friday, 28 June 2019 16:01<br>
                  > To: Andrew Alston <<a
                    href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>
                  <mailto:<a
                    href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>>><br>
                  > Cc: Noah <<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">noah@neo.co.tz</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">noah@neo.co.tz</a>>>;
                  JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <<a
                    href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a>>>;
                  RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>>><br>
                  > Subject: Re: [rpd] inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR
                  policy proposals - AFRINIC needs this policy now!<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 11:29 AM Andrew Alston
                  <<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>
                  <mailto:<a
                    href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>>>
                  wrote:<br>
                  > <br>
                  > You?re asking for the impossible ? because to get
                  that you?d need to go to all the brokers (I assume)<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > So, we jump into the dark, with no parachute
                  (data would have helped somehow), all eyes closed?
                  Keeping them open in these circumstances won't help
                  anyway.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Boubakar<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > From: Noah <<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">noah@neo.co.tz</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:noah@neo.co.tz"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">noah@neo.co.tz</a>>>
                  <br>
                  > Sent: Friday, 28 June 2019 14:17<br>
                  > To: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <<a
                    href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a>>><br>
                  > Cc: RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>>><br>
                  > Subject: Re: [rpd] inputs on IPv4 Inter-RIR
                  policy proposals - AFRINIC needs this policy now!<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > So Jordi,<br>
                  > <br>
                  > I still oppose this policy with strongest terms
                  possible. I still believe IPv4 space will leave our
                  region so fast when holders of Idle space who are yet
                  to put them to good use as was allocated/assigned will
                  trade them for some dollars rather than return them to
                  AfriNIC. What we need is a policy that would
                  discourage IPv4 from being transferred out of the
                  region because of attractive prices of IPv$ but rather
                  encourage more space coming into the region.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > We already have a transfer policy that can
                  facilitate internal transfers withing our region and I
                  am keen of getting a report from AfriNIC on how this
                  is going.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > @Jordi, please also share some statistical
                  numbers of available IPv4 space that would actually
                  come into our region so that we can work with figures
                  rather than assumptions.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > Noah<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 7:01 PM JORDI PALET
                  MARTINEZ via RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>>>
                  wrote:<br>
                  > <br>
                  > Hi again Sylvain,<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I?m very thankful for your inputs!<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > We need to make sure that others also
                  participate!<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > See below in-line.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Regards,<br>
                  > <br>
                  > Jordi<br>
                  > <br>
                  > @jordipalet<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > El 21/6/19 23:15, "Sylvain BAYA" <<a
                    href="mailto:abscoco@gmail.com" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">abscoco@gmail.com</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:abscoco@gmail.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">abscoco@gmail.com</a>>>
                  escribi?:<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Hi all,<br>
                  > <br>
                  > Le vendredi 21 juin 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
                  via RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>>>
                  a ?crit :<br>
                  > <br>
                  > Hi Sylvain,<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I want to thank you, I guess we won a ?strong?
                  contributor to policy discussions! (I recall your name
                  from previous discussions, but you?re now more active,
                  which is what I wish from every one).
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > :-D ...please don't expose me too much Jordi ;-)<br>
                  > <br>
                  > I'm just trying to do my best...i'm not any kind
                  of expert :'-(<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Now I realized that you were not on-site, pity!<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  See below, in-line.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Saludos,<br>
                  > <br>
                  > Jordi<br>
                  > <br>
                  > @jordipalet<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > El 20/6/19 22:37, "Sylvain BAYA" <<a
                    href="mailto:abscoco@gmail.com" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">abscoco@gmail.com</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:abscoco@gmail.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">abscoco@gmail.com</a>>>
                  escribi?:<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Hi all,<br>
                  > <br>
                  > Please see, inline, below...<br>
                  > <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Le jeudi 20 juin 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via
                  RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>>>
                  a ?crit :<br>
                  > <br>
                  > Hi Sylvain,<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Sorry the email was sent before I finished it ?<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Responding below, in-line.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Regards,<br>
                  > <br>
                  > Jordi<br>
                  > <br>
                  > @jordipalet<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > El 20/6/19 15:05, "Sylvain BAYA" <<a
                    href="mailto:abscoco@gmail.com" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">abscoco@gmail.com</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:abscoco@gmail.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">abscoco@gmail.com</a>>>
                  escribi?:<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Hi all,<br>
                  > <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Le jeudi 20 juin 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via
                  RPD <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>>>
                  a ?crit :<br>
                  > <br>
                  > As said, this text is redundant (see specific
                  text below my signature), but I don't mind to have
                  explicit text if this facilitate the community to
                  reach consensus.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > Here is my proposal, again, please comment about
                  this ASAP, so we can submit a new version already,
                  instead of waiting to be closer to the next meeting.
                  This way we can ensure that we get on time the staff
                  impact analysis, in case something else need to be
                  amended.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > "The Inter-RIR transfers will be automatically
                  suspended in case the balance between IPv4 out-going
                  and in-coming addresses becomes cero."
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Jordi,<br>
                  > <br>
                  > ...typos on ?zero? ?<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Yeah ? my spelling checker often confuses English
                  and Spanish!<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Anyway, here is a better version, because this
                  balance is actually ?cero? at the start of the
                  implementation, so the text may be misleading, we need
                  to define .
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Alright !<br>
                  > <br>
                  > I like the new visage of this policy proposal
                  because i really appreciate the way you are leading
                  the discussions around it.
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Believe me, that I always try to heard everybody
                  position and accommodate as much as possible, my own
                  thinking/knowledge and the text to that (or convincing
                  other if I believe they have a wrong vision). This is
                  the way to reach consensus.
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Go ahead on this way ! i declare my support for
                  such an approach, because i'm personaly sharing a
                  similar approach.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Hopefully other participants will also share it.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > While contributing to this thread, what i want is
                  to be sure that this policy proposal could be really
                  beneficial to AFRINIC region|community.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Same as me, again, the right thing to do.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > ?The Inter-RIR transfers will only be enabled
                  once AFRINIC enter into Exhaustion Phase 2 (<a
                    href="http://5.4.3.2" moz-do-not-send="true">5.4.3.2</a>
                  <<a href="http://5.4.3.2/" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">http://5.4.3.2/</a>>). The
                  Inter-RIR transfers will be automatically suspended in
                  case the number of out-going IPv4 addresses exceeds
                  the in-coming ones by six consecutive months.?<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > This version is a good starting point. Thanks.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I understand it like this :<br>
                  > <br>
                  > * This Policy Validity Starting Point :
                  Exhaustion Phase 2<br>
                  > <br>
                  > * Initial point : balance of zero (nothing
                  in|out)<br>
                  > <br>
                  > * First auto-stop point : when the in/out balance
                  becomes down<br>
                  > <br>
                  > ..* After 06 consecutive months {seems to be not
                  interesting for me}<br>
                  > <br>
                  > ..* Even 02 consecutive months is not really
                  interesting, because we miss an #x amount (or %) of
                  resource (IPv4) limit to not reach at any time
                  (without any mention of #y consecutive months) to
                  reduce an unwilling risk.
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > This policy shall be able, maybe, to stop a
                  transaction (in course) which could conduct us out of
                  a specific low acceptable in/out balance. So think
                  about it again please.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > This is not possible, I believe, unless someone
                  discovers a ?magic way to write it down? (which I
                  can?t see now). Anyway, I?m still trying to think
                  something before ending this email ?
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > ...quite difficult for sure :-)<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > It's simply confirming us that to reach the
                  *goal* of this (and other) policy proposal, we need to
                  think deeply on details. Other meaning : we need more
                  active volunteers|participants engaged with sincere
                  contributions.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > *EXACTLY!* Meetings time is precious and we
                  aren?t allowed to modify the text of the proposals
                  on-site, we need inputs way ahead!<br>
                  > <br>
                  > I?ve not personally been involved in transfers,
                  but I understand the process and transfers don?t
                  happen ?in the second?. There are documents to review,
                  justification to be reviewed by the two RIRs,
                  contracts to be signed, payments to be done (via an
                  escrow), etc. It is a matter of several days or weeks.
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Thanks for these clarifications.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > It may happen that in the middle of a month,
                  several ?negotiations? for transfers are running, and
                  some of them in one or the other direction may reach
                  or not in time for the end of that month. That?s why
                  I?m suggesting a number of months.
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > ...to my knowledge, to better text this situation
                  (and reach the *goal*) we must considere that the
                  transfer is started when the parties have sent a
                  request to the staff.
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > What we can also do is to add a new section with
                  advices for those who will need to start a inter RIR
                  transfer procedure. On that section, we shall explain
                  why they must not take more than one (?), two or three
                  months to complete the pre-process (b2b negociations).
                  They shall know and understand the risk to come too
                  late to the staff to request a transfer ; because the
                  negociation phase took too much time... :-/<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I don?t think this is possible. Transfers have a
                  lot of ?business talks? among the parties. Only once
                  the parties have reached an agreement, they need to go
                  into the process. You could do on the other way
                  around, it can be a mix of both. I don?t think the
                  community must provide a rule on that, because this
                  has not been done in other RIRs. If we try to setup
                  our own rule, then our policy will have mismatches
                  with the other policies and then we may be in the
                  situation that they are not reciprocal, or the
                  existing procedures in the other regions need to be
                  re-worked, why they are going to do it, now that we
                  are the last one?.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > If the staff tries to evaluate the transfers at a
                  single point in time, it may be misleading as some
                  operations in the opposite direction may be being
                  processed. The RIRs may have an ?alert? of a possible
                  transfer, depending on the direction, I don?t know if
                  the exiting coordination systems allow them to check
                  those (this will sort out the problem), but still will
                  not be precise, as some other folks may be
                  ?negotiating? a transfer and have not yet informed the
                  relevant RIRs until the parties agree.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Ok, we need a clarification from the staff. But
                  before that, i propose something below to address the
                  problem...<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > If we stop the policy immediately the balance
                  becomes ?bad? for AFRINIC, then a transfer in the
                  other direction will not be able to happen. You see
                  the point.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Ok you are right ! But let me try other
                  possibility|solution i see : are we still prioritising
                  incoming transfers ? :-)<br>
                  > <br>
                  > To be sure, i think we can include a similar (to
                  the following) text (about transfer procedure) :
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > ?Initiators of a transfer must start the
                  procedure earlier by submitting their request. The
                  transfer procedure is concluded after a cycle of $four
                  months, devided in two periods of $two months for
                  each. Initiators submit their case to the staff and
                  wait for the staff to give their conclusion at least
                  $two months after the "submissions period" and not
                  more than $four months (including the "verification
                  period"). The staff will collect the cases
                  (submissions|requests) during the "submissions
                  period". The staff can start to study the cases
                  immediately, after receiving them, until the end of
                  the "verification period" which is coinciding with the
                  next "submission period"; while collecting other
                  cases. Those in line with the CPM (policy compliant)
                  at the end of the correspondent "verification period".
                  The staff should focus to the goal : keep the in/out
                  balance exceding. Incoming transfer submissions shall
                  be prioritised and treated separately.?<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I don?t think this will work, as I just explained
                  a few reasons above. In principle I will not support
                  this.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > With this bit of text, i'm trying to solve a
                  problem you raised above.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > It does, at least, the following : <br>
                  > <br>
                  > * To change the approach in considering that <br>
                  > <br>
                  > * We can considerably diminish the risk by
                  allowing the staff to study the transfer submissions
                  (cases) during the same dedicated "verifications
                  period" (even just during $one month if possible) and<br>
                  > <br>
                  > * Inform all the requestors only after the
                  "verifications period"<br>
                  > <br>
                  > * With the *goal* balance in mind :-)<br>
                  > <br>
                  > * Special treathment for incoming transfers ;-)<br>
                  > <br>
                  > * A cycle of four months within two equal periods
                  for submissions and verifications
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > * More control of the balance <br>
                  > <br>
                  > * Focus : *goal* balance<br>
                  > <br>
                  > * ...<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > See below ? it is not needed. I think, just you
                  misunderstood my point 4.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > We need to ?take a bit of risk?, considering that
                  the real risk, looking at the numbers I?ve presented
                  is really low.
                  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I agree, but just a *bit of risk* :-)<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I wasn't able to follow your first presentation
                  during the PPM (Public Policy Meeting), just the
                  Hijacking one. Please share the slides of all your
                  policy proposal presentations.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > And now I realize this is part of the problem for
                  your questions. Please, pause this discussion until
                  you?re able to see the video of my presentation and
                  the slides! I guess then you may change a bit your
                  view about the risk, etc.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I already asked the staff (previous email) to
                  make sure they are published tomorrow. I think they
                  deserve the break today :-)<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Remember that ?nobody? from AFRINIC is forced to
                  sell. Who will sell? Those that for example, reduce or
                  close the business, or those that deploy IPv6, etc.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  Ok it walk samely for incoming and outgoing
                  transfers. Considering that we have a seller and a
                  buyer on both side transfers.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Who will buy? Those that go to AFRINIC, ask for
                  more, can?t get all what they need, and try to get the
                  rest of their needs via transfers.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > What is the logic here? Why ARIN is the major
                  donator to all the other RIRs?<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > ...to what i recall [1] they still have too much
                  unused IPv4 addresses.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > If we don?t take a risk, we lose.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > ...i'm ok with that, but let's try to find the
                  lowest risk :-)<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > This means that if one month there are ?more
                  addresses going out?, it happens again the next month,
                  and it happens again by a third month and so on, then
                  is suspended.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > ...so monthly public reports should be needed
                  (for the community to follow-up and for more
                  transparency) ?<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > If yes, let's clearly state|text it also.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I believe there is already a public AFRINIC
                  reporting of the Inter-RIR transfers, so we will see
                  this reported ASAP any transfer is completed I think.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Can someone share an uri ?<br>
                  > <br>
                  > I think we must insert this requirement to the
                  relevant section of the CPM, if not existent.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > If this is not the case (can please the staff
                  confirm?), I fully agree (for both Inter and
                  Intra-RIR) and will add a specific text so they are
                  reported, not just monthly, but with each completed
                  transfer.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > You are welcome ! Thanks :-)<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Which this web page, any member, the board, etc.,
                  can tell the staff at any point, if they don?t realize
                  by themselves, ?hey what is going on here? Are we good
                  with the transfers??.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Yes, transparency and more power to the community
                  ;-)<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I?ve also added a condition to make sure that
                  this policy only starts once we are in the next
                  exhaustion phase.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > So, you shall consider that, if AFRINIC
                  service|community doesn't gain anything in the balance
                  this policy should not be needed...<br>
                  > <br>
                  > And that should be clearly stated.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I agree with that, but I don?t think we need to
                  put that in the policy text, this should be in the
                  text of the policy justification.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > ...wasn't the point here. Apologize but English
                  is not my first tongue. <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > What i was (trying) advising|suggesting is to
                  ensure to text it the clearest possible ; in order to
                  remove any ambiguity.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > I'm glad that you have seen, by yourself, that
                  there was a problem with the first zero state.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Got it, thanks! And nothing to excuse!<br>
                  > <br>
                  > Note that in order to make it simpler, I've used
                  a text that instead of talking about %, is stating
                  that the balance of in/out is reached. This way we
                  ensure that the total number of the "region IPv4
                  addresses" never can go down regarding the actual
                  figures, so Africa never will lose addresses. Do you
                  think this is good enough?<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Ok after policing this, it seems to be necessary
                  to clearly state, *?policily?*, that the staff must
                  follow-up (automatically) the in/out balance, with
                  regular (automated) public reports and a special
                  (auto) stop report (for the zero state).<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I'm not sure how to "policy-ze" this idea.
                  Perhaps with a separate policy ?<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I?m not completely sure to understand 100% what
                  you mean, but let me try anyway: Staff is mandated to
                  follow the policies. So, during the implementation the
                  staff will make the necessary provisions so they get
                  an alarm when the balance of in-coming vs out-going
                  addresses becomes cero. It may be done automatically
                  anyway, but at least they should get an ?alarm?. The
                  operational details about ?how? to implement this are
                  outside of the policy scope.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Ok i am in accord with the logic of separation
                  between policy rules and their operational
                  implementations. I don't want us to ?policy-ze? the
                  implementation phase of any policy :-)<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > But you probably miss something in my above
                  suggestion. <br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > The point is that, if you don't clearly ask, via
                  a policy, for a regular (public) report (for example)
                  from the staff, you could not be sure to get it when
                  it shall be needed. Because, without a specific policy
                  provision, it will be just out of their duties...<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Let?s try it again, based on all the discussion
                  (the numbers are just to split the text now, they will
                  be correctly placed in the relevant part of the policy
                  proposal when we ?reach consensus? about this text:<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > 1.       Each time a transfer is completed, the
                  relevant, non-confidential information will be
                  automatically published in a specific web page,
                  including at least: Date of the transfer, transferred
                  addresses, source organization and RIR, destination
                  organization and RIR.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > 2. The Inter-RIR transfers will only be enabled
                  once AFRINIC enter into Exhaustion Phase 2 (<a
                    href="http://5.4.3.2" moz-do-not-send="true">5.4.3.2</a>
                  <<a href="http://5.4.3.2/" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">http://5.4.3.2/</a>>).<br>
                  > <br>
                  > 3.       The Inter-RIR transfers will be
                  automatically suspended in case the number of outgoing
                  IPv4 addresses exceeds the incoming ones by six
                  consecutive months.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > 4.       The staff can provisionally suspend any
                  suspicious operation that creates a big unbalance
                  against AFRINIC, until the board takes a decision.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > See point 4. If there is any suspicious
                  unbalance, the suspension temporary suspension of
                  *that* operation protects our pool of addresses, for a
                  few days (I guess the board in that case should call
                  for a decision by email or by conference call), and
                  meanwhile, it can be observed if other ?incoming?
                  operations will restore the balance.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Possible solution, thanks for the effort you
                  produced above. But there is still more than
                  acceptable risk on it (including point 4) ; because
                  the next new transfer request can come after the *few*
                  days of suspension.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > The point here is that the staff is still able to
                  suspend any suspicious operation. Not just one. Is not
                  that clear my text? (any)<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Please look how to also consider the alternative
                  solution i have proposed above. I don't need you to
                  keep that text as it is, but to use it to figure how
                  it could be merged with yours and reduce the risk (no
                  suspension with it).<br>
                  > <br>
                  > __<br>
                  > <br>
                  > [1]: MIT and their 8 million IPv4 addresses ? <a
href="https://www.techspot.com/news/69055-mit-unload-8-million-ipv4-addresses-fund-ipv6.html"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
https://www.techspot.com/news/69055-mit-unload-8-million-ipv4-addresses-fund-ipv6.html</a>
                  <<a
href="https://www.techspot.com/news/69055-mit-unload-8-million-ipv4-addresses-fund-ipv6.html"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.techspot.com/news/69055-mit-unload-8-million-ipv4-addresses-fund-ipv6.html</a>><br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Friendly,<br>
                  > <br>
                  > --sb.<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > I really believe this is not needed, it can be
                  done applying the bylaws (very recently ARIN board
                  suspended in emergency a policy, so it is a good
                  demonstration that this works even if is not in the
                  policy) but I?m happy to keep this text if this means
                  that we are more unconcerned this way.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > What do you think?<br>
                  > <br>
                  >  <br>
                  > <br>
                  > Thanks!<br>
                  > <br>
                  > [...]<br>
                  > <br>
                  >    <br>
                  > <br>
                  > _______________________________________________
                  RPD mailing list <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
                    RPD@afrinic.net</a> <mailto:<a
                    href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a>>
                  <a
                    href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
                    https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
                  <<a
                    href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>><br>
                  > <br>
                  > **********************************************<br>
                  > IPv4 is over<br>
                  > Are you ready for the new Internet ?<br>
                  > <a href="http://www.theipv6company.com"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
                    http://www.theipv6company.com</a> <<a
                    href="http://www.theipv6company.com/"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.theipv6company.com/</a>><br>
                  > The IPv6 Company<br>
                  > <br>
                  > This electronic message contains information
                  which may be privileged or confidential. The
                  information is intended to be for the exclusive use of
                  the individual(s) named above and further
                  non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying,
                  distribution or use of the contents of this
                  information, even if partially, including attached
                  files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a
                  criminal offense. If you are not the intended
                  recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying,
                  distribution or use of the contents of this
                  information, even if partially, including attached
                  files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a
                  criminal offense, so you must reply to the original
                  sender to inform about this communication and delete
                  it.<br>
                  > <br>
                  > _______________________________________________<br>
                  > RPD mailing list<br>
                  > <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a>><br>
                  > <a
                    href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
                    https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
                  <<a
                    href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>><br>
                  > _______________________________________________<br>
                  > RPD mailing list<br>
                  > <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
                  <mailto:<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a>><br>
                  > <a
                    href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
                    https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
                  <<a
                    href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>>_______________________________________________<br>
                  > RPD mailing list<br>
                  > <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
                  > <a
                    href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
                    https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
                  <br>
                  -------------- next part --------------<br>
                  An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
                  URL: <<a
href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20190628/0764a333/attachment.html"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20190628/0764a333/attachment.html</a>><br>
                  <br>
                  ------------------------------<br>
                  <br>
                  Subject: Digest Footer<br>
                  <br>
                  _______________________________________________<br>
                  RPD mailing list<br>
                  <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
                  <a
                    href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  ------------------------------<br>
                  <br>
                  End of RPD Digest, Vol 153, Issue 235<br>
                  *************************************<o:p></o:p></span></p>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:70.8pt"><span lang="ES">_______________________________________________
            RPD mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
            <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
              moz-do-not-send="true">
              https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:35.4pt"><span
            lang="ES"><br>
            **********************************************<br>
            IPv4 is over<br>
            Are you ready for the new Internet ?<br>
            <a href="http://www.theipv6company.com"
              moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.theipv6company.com</a><br>
            The IPv6 Company<br>
            <br>
            This electronic message contains information which may be
            privileged or confidential. The information is intended to
            be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above
            and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying,
            distribution or use of the contents of this information,
            even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
            prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you
            are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure,
            copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
            information, even if partially, including attached files, is
            strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense,
            so you must reply to the original sender to inform about
            this communication and delete it.<br>
            <br>
            <br>
            <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
            lang="ES"><br>
            **********************************************<br>
            IPv4 is over<br>
            Are you ready for the new Internet ?<br>
            <a href="http://www.theipv6company.com"
              moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.theipv6company.com</a><br>
            The IPv6 Company<br>
            <br>
            This electronic message contains information which may be
            privileged or confidential. The information is intended to
            be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above
            and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying,
            distribution or use of the contents of this information,
            even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
            prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you
            are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure,
            copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
            information, even if partially, including attached files, is
            strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense,
            so you must reply to the original sender to inform about
            this communication and delete it.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>