Hi Douglas,
At 00:07 14-05-2009, Douglas Onyango wrote:
Not sure i fully understood your first question.

IPv4 is a public resource which AfriNIC manages on behalf of its constituents. As we move towards the IPv4 address exhaustion, there will be a scarcity for IPv4 addresses. The proposal is to ensure a fair allocation from the limited pool of IPv4 addresses. Without that, a large network or country can end up with a larger slice of the pool. This will have a negative impact on countries or networks that experience a slower growth.

There are a few cable links currently being deployed on the continent. Once the infrastructure is there, we may see more demand for IP address space within these countries. It's only when AfriNIC turns down their IPv4 allocation request that they will understand the consequences of this proposed policy. It will be too late to overturn the policy once the IPv4 address pool is exhausted.

Before devising a policy for managing the last /8 IPv4 address pool, we should review IPv4 address usage in the region over the last years and do a projection to find out how long the IPv4 address pool will last. We should take into account the number of LIRs and see that there is a fair distribution.

Your proposal specifies that a LIR can be allocated a /23 (IPv4 maximum allocation size) and four additional /23. My question is about whether the aggregate allocation (one + four) will allow equitable distribution of IPv4 addresses among LIRs. To put it differently, how did you reach these numbers?

This policy is meant to help in the transition from v4 to v6, and as such every initiative to help people move in the direction of v6 would be a good one. one of them is availing the addresses (if they don't have any)

Getting people to adopt IPv6 is a good initiative. But that should not turn out into dishing out IP address space if the assignee does not justify the request. If members do not have any IPv6 address space, it is generally because:

 (i) they are not implementing IPv6 on their network

 (ii) they plan to extend IPv4 lifetime through by using NAT

An IPv6 address allocation won't change that. If you want to help the transition from IPv4 to IPv6, you can specify that the member shows a migration plan. However, I don't think that it's a good strategy as AfriNIC cannot tell people how they should run their networks.

Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd

Reply via email to