<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 19/08/2019 03:30, JORDI PALET
MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A68BB57A-1680-482F-B712-211D44B79CDA@consulintel.es">
<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:"Times New Roman \(Cuerpo en alfa";
panose-1:2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3 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;}
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;}
span.EstiloCorreo18
{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:70.85pt 3.0cm 70.85pt 3.0cm;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
lang="EN-US">Hi Daniel,<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">By not having a transfer’s policy, you’re just
facilitating those transfers to keep occurring, which is bad
for the region. We don’t know if those transfers are being
done for Afrinic legacy resources, or by “bad” employees of
existing ISPs, the ISPs itself, or combinations of those
options. Because they don’t get properly registered, it is
impossible to know.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
As mentioned before I don't consider this a reason for any propose
to pass. If there are transfers that occur "under the table" the
people or organizations doing them are the wrong ones, not the RIR
for not having a policy that allows. They are violating current
rules and they must bind to them or be sanctioned, therefore there
are actions that can be taken against these wrong actions. <br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A68BB57A-1680-482F-B712-211D44B79CDA@consulintel.es">
<div class="WordSection1">
<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>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"
lang="EN-US">The data you’re asking was in my presentation.<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">Most of the transfers are leaving ARIN towards
the other regions.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Towards other regions that have already advanced to a Phase 2 like
state or beyond, not the case of AfriNIC. If that would be the case
they were allowed right now chances are much higher that resources
escape Africa than they come from other regions. This is not just an
opinion, but logic. That's one of the reasons I have been saying
this brings *zero benefits* to Africa at the present.<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A68BB57A-1680-482F-B712-211D44B79CDA@consulintel.es">
<div class="WordSection1">
<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>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">Also, if
you have followed the discussion in the list, I’ve
proposed to add some text to the policy proposal, to make
sure that only starts when there aren’t more resources in
Afrinic, and with some measures to closely watch the
situation.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
I see your efforts and good will to get reach consensus on this
proposal, but I don't really think it is the time for it, even
straight after it enters Phase 2.<br>
I am not against having a Inter-RIR transfer policy at some point
and I recognize the need of it when the RIR reaches a different
scenario. This is just not the case for AfriNIC now and only exposes
it to a risk of IP space to looted from the region.
<p>I refuse to believe that without a policy like this the region
will stop growing, simple because it is still possible to get a
fair amount of addresses for local organizations who need. And
even when it enters Phase 2 there are multiple alternatives. When
that happens we can discuss that again based on the *new reality*
that will give us better support to evaluate if that will really
bring advantages at that point. As illustrated in other messages
LACNIC region survived 2 years without a Inter-RIR transfer policy
after it went into a Phase 2 (in that case even more restricted
than the one scheduled for Africa - only new entrants) and I have
no knowledge of any organization that went bankrupt because of
that.</p>
<p>Finally with regards the point suggested in the other message to
suspend the policy if outgoing IPv4 exceeds the incoming one by
six month it showa there are doubts if may happen or not, so if
there are doubts it is better just not to do.<br>
Again African organizations still don't need to go to market to
get IP space, but can get directly from the RIR.<br>
</p>
<p>Therefore I propose you abandon this proposal for now and
re-present it in the future when the scenario changes and a policy
like this is really needed and will bring benefits to the region.</p>
<p>Best regards<br>
Fernando<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:A68BB57A-1680-482F-B712-211D44B79CDA@consulintel.es">
<div class="WordSection1">
<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"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">As more
IPv6 deployment happens outside of Africa (and this is a
reality), more resources can come in to Africa, not in the
other way around. Also, again, note that the major donor
is ARIN. If what you say is true, then it will not be ARIN
the major donor.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<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">El 18/8/19
14:31, "DANIEL NANGHAKA" <<a
href="mailto:dndannang@gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true">dndannang@gmail.com</a>>
escribió:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">Dear All, <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">I have been
following the IPv4 Inter-RIR legacy Resource Transfer
discussion right from the start. I am in strong
disagreement towards this policy. This policy does not
have a benefit for the Africa Region. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">Following
the presentation at the AFRINIC Meeting in Kampala, it was
highlighted that some of AFRINICs resources were sold on
the black market. The challenge here is that there is no
clear record of which resources are not utilised and the
ones that are utilised. The entities that are in ownership
of these resources should provide an evaluation of the
respective assignments - resources that are not being
utilised should be brought back to the AFRINIC Pool for
re-assignment. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">Secondly,
with reference to Inter RIR transfer policy, there is a
need to clearly assess the RIRs that have passed this
policy and evaluate where these resources are going. I am
interested in the numbers. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">For Africa's
case, there is still a need for IPv4 resource and we as a
region we should allow a smooth transition to IPv6 and not
force depletion. Africa's digital economy needs to grow
and when some policies are passed Africa's digital economy
will be retarded. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">From an
economic perspective, the forces of demand and supply
apply. The high demand for IPv4 resources in other regions
shows that the value of IPv4 remains strong and a
necessity. Every Network Engineer knows that IPv4 is
needed for IPv6 translation. This IPv4 inter RIR policy
when passed, will lead to a quick depletion in less than 2
months which I think when passed will be a big risk to the
mandate of AFRINIC's formation in managing of the Africa
Region resources. What will be the mandate of AFRINIC
after the IPv4 Policy? <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">The IPv4
resources were allocated for Africa then why for sure do
we want to transfer what we were given. This is like
selling our digital economy. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">Based on my
opinions above, I strongly do not support this policy. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">Daniel K.
Nanghaka<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">On Sat, 17
Aug 2019 at 21:14, <<a
href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net"
moz-do-not-send="true">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">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: RPD Digest, Vol 155, Issue 9 (Amutuhaire
Robert)<br>
2. Re: New Policy Proposal Received - "IPv4 Inter-RIR
Legacy<br>
Resource Transfers (Comprehensive Scope)<br>
AFPUB-2019-v4-002-DRAFT01" (Andrew Alston)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 19:50:48 +0300<br>
From: Amutuhaire Robert <<a
href="mailto:arobert49@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">arobert49@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [rpd] RPD Digest, Vol 155, Issue 9<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAEHKB_wzZtvO+ySU4zCGTZ8KR5_xF8AXZUBS9X=<a
href="mailto:7%2BpaZWZAA_A@mail.gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">7+paZWZAA_A@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. Re: New Policy Proposal Received - "IPv4 Inter-RIR
Legacy<br>
Resource Transfers (Comprehensive Scope)<br>
AFPUB-2019-v4-002-DRAFT01" (Fernando Frediani)<br>
<br>
Thank you, Mr. Fernando, for the great digest<br>
I do agree with you. I also think allowing inter-RIR
transfers really does<br>
open wide a door to fraud and misuse and any other
unexpected<br>
circumstances. It's just so risky<br>
<br>
Sincerely,<br>
Amutuhaire Robert<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 3:00 PM <<a
href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
> 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: New Policy Proposal Received - "IPv4
Inter-RIR Legacy<br>
> Resource Transfers (Comprehensive Scope)<br>
> AFPUB-2019-v4-002-DRAFT01" (Fernando
Frediani)<br>
><br>
><br>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
><br>
> Message: 1<br>
> Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 16:43:36 -0300<br>
> From: Fernando Frediani <<a
href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>><br>
> To: <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
> Subject: Re: [rpd] New Policy Proposal Received -
"IPv4 Inter-RIR<br>
> Legacy Resource Transfers (Comprehensive
Scope)<br>
> AFPUB-2019-v4-002-DRAFT01"<br>
> Message-ID: <<a
href="mailto:a9363560-d392-21e4-f70f-5552bc12a502@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">a9363560-d392-21e4-f70f-5552bc12a502@gmail.com</a>><br>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8;
format=flowed<br>
><br>
> Hello<br>
><br>
> I want to position myself against this proposal for
the many reasons below.<br>
><br>
> First I believe this does not bring any benefits to
Africa region<br>
> allowing IP space to go out of the region and the
same way Africa is not<br>
> in need yet to receive IP space from other regions
as AfriNIC still has<br>
> availability for assignment to its members.<br>
><br>
> Allowing inter-RIR transfers opens a wide door for
fraud by<br>
> organizations from other continents establishing a
"virtual" or "fake"<br>
> offices in Africa, request some IP space and send
them out of the region<br>
> afterwards.<br>
> As AfriNIC is the only RIR who still has IP space
available for its<br>
> members they should be protected and made sure they
are assigned only<br>
> for real usage in the continent.<br>
> It is pretty reasonable to think that the major
interest will be in<br>
> companies outside Africa to come to the region, get
IP space and send it<br>
> out than the contrary as AfriNIC members can get IP
space directly from<br>
> the RIR. Why would members need it coming from
other regions then ?<br>
> Also the 12 months period to request receive more
IP space from AfriNIC<br>
> is quiet short in my view and make it worth in
order to increase fraud<br>
> for those who wish to send these addresses out of
the region.<br>
><br>
> Even if it's expected AfriNIC's IP space to run out
anytime soon I still<br>
> don't believe it is a reason to allow inter-RIR
transfers. In LACNIC<br>
> region for example it exhausted IPv4 space for
existing members in 2017<br>
> and only very recently after 2 years the inter-RIR
transfer has reached<br>
> consensus there, so I think this type of proposal
should be re-evaluated<br>
> later on in the future when the scenario changes
and when there are real<br>
> benefits for Africa region.<br>
><br>
> The fact that transfers happen "under the table" I
don't consider this<br>
> as a strong argument in favor of this change.
Transfers under the table<br>
> are wrong and against the current policies
therefore those who may be<br>
> doing it are the wrong ones, not the RIR for not
allowing such<br>
> transfers. Any organization who received IP space
from AfriNIC must bind<br>
> to the current policies and that includes not to do
transfers that are<br>
> not allowed. If they insist on that, sanctions must
be applied against<br>
> them, therefore there are mechanisms to properly
fix this issue, if it<br>
> exists.<br>
><br>
> The deployment of IPv6 is not impacted for AfricNIC
members for the<br>
> current scenario as IPv4 is still available to be
requested by<br>
> organizations for usage by transition mechanisms
for example. Even when<br>
> that is not possible anymore there are still
alternatives as for<br>
> example: 1) re-use of already hold IP space, 2)
establishment of a<br>
> dedicated pool for specific usage with IPv6
transition mechanisms or 3)<br>
> prioritization of new entrants, the last two for
example based on the<br>
> /12 reserved for future use as stated by section
5.4.7.1 of the<br>
> AfriNIC's Exhaustion Policy<br>
><br>
> I also second a comment made by another person in
this discussion here:<br>
> "Allowing Inter-RIR transfers open room for
resources meant to be used<br>
> in our region being traded fast due to economic
reasons beyond the real<br>
> purpose they were meant for which is to help build
the African Internet".<br>
><br>
> Therefore I don't think is good or necessary for
Africa region to allow<br>
> inter-RIR transfers and put the RIR under the risk
of its address space<br>
> to go out of the region unnecessarily and in an
unneeded scenario.<br>
><br>
> Best regards<br>
> Fernando<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><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 155, Issue 9<br>
> ***********************************<br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a
href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20190817/d890b75d/attachment-0001.html"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20190817/d890b75d/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 18:11:28 +0000<br>
From: Andrew Alston <<a
href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>><br>
To: Fernando Frediani <<a
href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>>, "<a
href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [rpd] New Policy Proposal Received - "IPv4
Inter-RIR<br>
Legacy Resource Transfers (Comprehensive Scope)<br>
AFPUB-2019-v4-002-DRAFT01"<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a
href="mailto:DBBPR03MB5415BE0A0EDDEB9CAB9628BEEEAE0@DBBPR03MB5415.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">DBBPR03MB5415BE0A0EDDEB9CAB9628BEEEAE0@DBBPR03MB5415.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com</a>><br>
<br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Fernando ?<br>
<br>
The moment phase 2 kicks in ? an ISP will be limited to
extremely small blocks ? transition mechanisms to IPv6
are *NOT* always a viable alternative ? and this was my
point ? there are a TON of services for which there is
NO ipv6 equivalency at the moment ? transition
mechanisms do NOT facility the use of services that are
entirely bound to IPv4 at this point. I can list
multiple examples. The solution to this problem is to
get feature parity between V4 and V6 ? but we?re a long
from being there. The solution to this is actually
largely found in SR ? but, since there is at least one
global vendor who has stated categorically that they
will not be writing any further control plane code to
facility MPLS in relation to V6 ? this becomes a problem
? unless you implement SRv6 to get the feature parity ?
and considering that SRv6 in its original form imposes a
significantly higher overhead on bandwidth than even the
ATM cell tax used to ? that?s not viable. So the next
option after that would be using SRv6 CRH or SRv6 uSID
to remove the overhead ? unfortunately that right now is
a long way from happening ? since its currently stalled
in the SPRING WG and there is a deadlock between the
approaches and the attempts to mediate and get inter-op
so that we can proceed with something we need ? hit
problems because one of the vendors involved has stated
categorically that they have no interest in inter-op on
the other standard.<br>
<br>
As such ? You cannot tell ISP?s to ?transition? until
there is feature parity on the services they need ? you
also cannot restrict the ability of an ISP to grow and
to function and to provide services. If you do that ?
rest assured ? the ISP in question is going to go and
find space from somewhere ? and if they cannot transfer
it in ? because the community refuses to give them a
transfer policy ? they will either go and establish in
another region and bring in the space that way ? which
takes money off the continent ? or they will get the
space ?under the table?. Rest assured ? NOT having a
transfer policy ? puts service providers that require v4
because of the lack of parity between V4 and V6 at risk
? and those ISP?s *WILL* find a way to get space ? the
only question is ? will the methods used to get that
space benefit the continent ? or result in ISP?s using
alternative RIR?s because the RIR that is meant to serve
their needs is failing to do so?<br>
<br>
I would *LOVE* to get rid of V4 on my network ? is it
practical? No ? not until the feature parity is there ?
and it simply isn?t ? which is one of the reasons I?ve
been putting so much work into stuff like SR. As I said
at the V6 Ops group in Montreal earlier this year ? if
you wanna know what hampers IPv6 deployment ? which
would solve some of these problems ? it?s the fact that
*THERE IS NO FEATURE PARITY*<br>
<br>
Andrew<br>
<br>
<br>
From: Fernando Frediani <<a
href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>><br>
Sent: Saturday, 17 August 2019 19:36<br>
To: <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [rpd] New Policy Proposal Received - "IPv4
Inter-RIR Legacy Resource Transfers (Comprehensive
Scope) AFPUB-2019-v4-002-DRAFT01"<br>
<br>
<br>
Hi<br>
This is not about a "hypothesis" but rather a quiet
obvious and logic thing to face. If Africa is the only
region that still has space left for its members and the
rest of the world is seeking for more IP space at lower
cost it makes total sense for someone to think in trying
to get IP space form this region and send them out to
where is interesting to them if such proposal ever reach
consensus. Luckily I don't think it will be the case
given the number of oppositions raised and good points
put against it.<br>
I think maybe you misunderstood some of what has been
said and discussed about this topic but I will try to
answer some of the points raised.<br>
On 17/08/2019 09:52, Andrew Alston wrote:<br>
Hi Fernando, Let me ask you a few questions<br>
<br>
* You say AfriNIC still has space ? yet because of
the soft landing ? the size of allocations for which a
member can apply are extremely smaller ? especially once
phase 2 kicks in ? so ? for those that need more than
this ? where do you propose they get it in the absence
of this policy and the absence of blocks for sale on the
continent?<br>
This is not true. In the current phase an African member
who needs IP space can just request, justify and will
get the addresses needed. Just when it enters phase 2 it
will still be possible to get a smaller block and at
that point ISPs should have done their homework to
prioritize the addresses they already hold to transition
mechanisms rather than the way they were used to use in
the past. That is probably the reason this is called
soft landing. Nobody can be get by surprise.<br>
The most important is that as it stands now African
members can get IP space normally, they don't need to go
to the market to get extra space and it is a reason that
reinforces that this proposal brings zero benefit to the
region.<br>
And the fact local members can still get the space they
request, this proposal should not pass, otherwise it
will be a even higher risk of fraud from external
organizations at the current Phase of IPv4 Exhaustion.<br>
(Source: <a href="https://www.afrinic.net/cpm-1-0#s5_4"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.afrinic.net/cpm-1-0#s5_4</a><<a
href="https://www.afrinic.net/cpm-1-0#s5_4"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.afrinic.net/cpm-1-0#s5_4</a>>)<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
* How does the interest in companies coming from
outside to get space have anything to do with the
companies on the continent needing to get space from
outside? Please explain the correlation<br>
I believe it is pretty much explained above, but lets go
a bit more into it. Companies from other regions may
find cheaper to open a "fake" or "virtual" company in
Africa region to get addresses from here and afterwards
request a transfer to another RIR where the address will
really be used by them. The cost to buy a /24 or a /22
in the market makes the economics pretty worth for
fraudsters to do all necessary and bureaucratic work to
open up and fake company in Africa in the attempt to get
these addresses.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
* Please explain how having a transfer policy
creates a more fraudulent environment than people who
take space off the continent without updating the whois
records and outside of the auspicious of the RIR ? and
how you would ever prove that is actually happening or
not.<br>
<br>
* You state that those who transfer outside of the
system should be sanctioned ? under what laws ? please
cite legal system and case law? Last I checked there
was no legal right to determine who can use an integer
on the internet<br>
I think maybe you misunderstand either what I said or
how the RIR system works. When any organization becomes
a RIR member and receives a block, it is obliged to use
it according to the current rules, policies and behave
according to the bylaws and the contract they signed and
agreed. There are cases where violations on the policy
or how the organization handle the IP space can get
these resources revoked from the organization. This
works like that on any RIR, not just in AfriNIC.<br>
Therefore if the current policies don't allow transfers
"under the table" (quiet obvious) and if such wrong
attitude and violation of the policy proved the resource
holder doesn't have usage for that IP space it can be
revoked by the RIR. Simple as that !<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
* With regards to ?If people run out of ipv4 and
cant get more they can use ipv6? ? please explain how:<br>
<br>
* To do L2VPN circuits in the absence of v4 and
the absence of law end hardware to do EVPN (and lack of
support for EVPN-VPWS)<br>
* To do traffic engineering when LDPv6 is dead to
the point where it?s unusable<br>
* To do L3VPN ? which currently in every vendor
I?ve tested requires a V4 underlay<br>
I am not sure what you are trying to say with that.<br>
When an organization cannot get **any more address**
(therefore only after phase 2 is finished- a while from
now) it means it still has address to use or re-used for
different and more efficient proposed as transition
mechanisms and until that happens the dependency on IPv4
will be lower than it is now a days. Still on such
scenarios there are still alternatives as for example
the mentioned in the previous message to create a new
policy to assign that last /12 revered under section
5.4.7.1<<a href="http://5.4.7.1" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://5.4.7.1</a>> for new
entrants and for IPv6 transition mechanisms as it exists
in other RIRs.<br>
At that point maybe will be a better time to discuss a
Inter-RIR transfer policy again with much less risk that
addresses will be looted from the region.<br>
<br>
<br>
*<br>
<br>
* The story about space being taken out of Africa ?
Please explain why the world would come pillaging Africa
? when Africa has such a tiny pool to start with ? is it
not far easier to go and buy elsewhere in the world
where unused blocks are common and available<br>
<br>
Explained above about the economics that make it worth
for fraudster to come to the region, establish a company
to get addresses and then request the transfer out of
the region. This is not just a point of view, but pretty
much an easy mathematics question.<br>
<br>
Said that, I am unable to see **any benefit** such
proposal bring to African region at the current
scenario. Instead it only bring risks (in the current
Phase 1 even higher risks) and maybe the only
beneficiaries to this policy will be the IP transfer
companies and as far as I know it's not the mission of
any RIR to create policies to benefit such entities.<br>
<br>
Fernando<br>
<br>
*<br>
<br>
So ? once we get the answers to all of this ? then ? we
can potentially test your hypothesis as stated below ?
but until then ? I can?t see your logic<br>
<br>
Andrew<br>
<br>
<br>
From: Fernando Frediani <<a
href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>><mailto:<a
href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>><br>
Date: Friday, 16 August 2019 at 22:45<br>
To: "<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="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] New Policy Proposal Received - "IPv4
Inter-RIR Legacy Resource Transfers (Comprehensive
Scope) AFPUB-2019-v4-002-DRAFT01"<br>
<br>
Hello<br>
<br>
I want to position myself against this proposal for the
many reasons below.<br>
<br>
First I believe this does not bring any benefits to
Africa region<br>
allowing IP space to go out of the region and the same
way Africa is not<br>
in need yet to receive IP space from other regions as
AfriNIC still has<br>
availability for assignment to its members.<br>
<br>
Allowing inter-RIR transfers opens a wide door for fraud
by<br>
organizations from other continents establishing a
"virtual" or "fake"<br>
offices in Africa, request some IP space and send them
out of the region<br>
afterwards.<br>
As AfriNIC is the only RIR who still has IP space
available for its<br>
members they should be protected and made sure they are
assigned only<br>
for real usage in the continent.<br>
It is pretty reasonable to think that the major interest
will be in<br>
companies outside Africa to come to the region, get IP
space and send it<br>
out than the contrary as AfriNIC members can get IP
space directly from<br>
the RIR. Why would members need it coming from other
regions then ?<br>
Also the 12 months period to request receive more IP
space from AfriNIC<br>
is quiet short in my view and make it worth in order to
increase fraud<br>
for those who wish to send these addresses out of the
region.<br>
<br>
Even if it's expected AfriNIC's IP space to run out
anytime soon I still<br>
don't believe it is a reason to allow inter-RIR
transfers. In LACNIC<br>
region for example it exhausted IPv4 space for existing
members in 2017<br>
and only very recently after 2 years the inter-RIR
transfer has reached<br>
consensus there, so I think this type of proposal should
be re-evaluated<br>
later on in the future when the scenario changes and
when there are real<br>
benefits for Africa region.<br>
<br>
The fact that transfers happen "under the table" I don't
consider this<br>
as a strong argument in favor of this change. Transfers
under the table<br>
are wrong and against the current policies therefore
those who may be<br>
doing it are the wrong ones, not the RIR for not
allowing such<br>
transfers. Any organization who received IP space from
AfriNIC must bind<br>
to the current policies and that includes not to do
transfers that are<br>
not allowed. If they insist on that, sanctions must be
applied against<br>
them, therefore there are mechanisms to properly fix
this issue, if it<br>
exists.<br>
<br>
The deployment of IPv6 is not impacted for AfricNIC
members for the<br>
current scenario as IPv4 is still available to be
requested by<br>
organizations for usage by transition mechanisms for
example. Even when<br>
that is not possible anymore there are still
alternatives as for<br>
example: 1) re-use of already hold IP space, 2)
establishment of a<br>
dedicated pool for specific usage with IPv6 transition
mechanisms or 3)<br>
prioritization of new entrants, the last two for example
based on the<br>
/12 reserved for future use as stated by section
5.4.7.1<<a href="http://5.4.7.1" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://5.4.7.1</a>> of the<br>
AfriNIC's Exhaustion Policy<br>
<br>
I also second a comment made by another person in this
discussion here:<br>
"Allowing Inter-RIR transfers open room for resources
meant to be used<br>
in our region being traded fast due to economic reasons
beyond the real<br>
purpose they were meant for which is to help build the
African Internet".<br>
<br>
Therefore I don't think is good or necessary for Africa
region to allow<br>
inter-RIR transfers and put the RIR under the risk of
its address space<br>
to go out of the region unnecessarily and in an unneeded
scenario.<br>
<br>
Best regards<br>
Fernando<br>
<br>
<br>
<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>
<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a
href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20190817/fa92fe15/attachment.html"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20190817/fa92fe15/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 155, Issue 12<br>
************************************<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">_______________________________________________
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> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<br>
**********************************************<br>
IPv4 is over<br>
Are you ready for the new Internet ?<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.theipv6company.com">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>
<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>