No Omo, I still oppose the policy, because unlike those that wrote that policy, I have actually done IP auditing and know how completely impractical it is to do it on any scale.
Under that policy if auditing was done the way I checked on your space, I point out that the people we are so quick to say are taking space out of Africa are far more in compliance than people who have have legitimate reasons for not having stuff in the table. With regards to your space - let's look at facts. The space was allocated in 2010, and I believe it the initial money came under the frenia project (which btw had more applications than it could fulfill, and came to an end because if I recall there was not money to continue it). Could be wrong on the frenia thing, would have to go back and check. Since the date of allocation only one /24 out of your /22 has ever showed up on the internet - announced by Sonatel. Now, considering there is a requirement by policy that you can deploy a minimum of 50% immediately - something doesn't add up here. Unless you have a very specific reason why you have a need for globally unique space that is not in the table (as is the case with an IXP), and if you do - it just makes my point about the impossibility of the audits as proposed. If you don't wacren is in violation of the policy and should return the space. That simple Andrew Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef> ________________________________ From: Omo Oaiya <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 12:46:41 PM To: Andrew Alston Cc: Omo Oaiya; Owen DeLong; General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] IPv4 depletion in AFRINIC will speed up IPv6 adoption - myth or fact? On 28 October 2016 at 18:25, Andrew Alston <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: And while you sit and advocate for preservation of IPv4 space, will you lead by example and return the 75% of space your own organisation has had for 6 years and has never announced? I can provide the prefix if you like, and the BGP Play data to back it up. Or are you advocating its ok to stop others getting space to preserve it while you yourself sit on space that is in clear and total violation of the Ipv4 allocation policies? No I am not advocating that. I find your new interest in adhering to policies encouraging. Why stop at my word or interpretation of incomplete information you don't understand? I will submit to a review of any allocations related to me by AFRINIC at any time. I have expressed emphatic support of the Internet Number Resources Audit policy proposal which also covers IPv6 and ASNs - http://www.afrinic.net/community/policy-development/policy-proposals/1827-internet-number-resources-review-by-afrinic I recall that you were the first to object on grounds that resemble your current line of inquiry. I will strongly oppose this policy - it is impractical, unenforceable and hugely open to abuse. Organisation X doesn't like Organisation Y, Organisation X goes to AfriNIC and goes "omg I think someone is not using their space properly", Organisation Y is now under audit and wasting valuable time and effort when its entirely possible their space usage is entirely legitimate. - https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2016/005466.html Are you now able to see that the proposal is useful and why we should all support in passing it through quickly? -- Omo Oaiya CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN Mobile: +234 808 888 1571<tel:%2B234%20808%20888%201571> , +221 784 305 224 Skype: kodion<http:///> http://www.wacren.net <http:///>
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
