Hello Gents, Thanks for the contributions. May i point out that an earlier version of this document had the 10% that you now propose, the caveat was the fact that corporations could match into the continent and signup for addresses only to repatriate them to other regions, hence the 100% usage within the service region (as in current proposal).
The current 10% proposition brings this problem back to the table and if there is a different way of dealing with it or if you have plausible reason to believe "connect backs" should take priority over preservation of this very scarce resource, then be my guests. Regards, Douglas Onyango +256(0712)981329 Life is the educators practical joke in which you spend the first half learning, and the second half learning that everything you learned was wrong. --- On Fri, 11/27/09, Andrew Alston <[email protected]> wrote: From: Andrew Alston <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [AfriNIC-rpd] IPv4 Softlanding Proposal Update To: "SM" <[email protected]>, [email protected], "AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion List" <[email protected]> Date: Friday, November 27, 2009, 9:01 PM Personally I'm extremely opposed to this entire clause for the following reasons: An African company that expands into European/American/Asian space now needs another allocation, from another RIR, which: a.) causes more deaggregation and more routes in an already congested routing table b.) wastes space because of multiple allocations and less efficient use of space c.) forces the African company to form relationships with RIR's outside of their primary base of operations The RIR's job as far as I am concerned is to allocate resources to companies who have their primary presence in the RIR's designated geographic region. It is NOT to police where that IP space is used by the company that it allocates it to. It's a little like selling someone a car and telling them they may never drive it across the border... Just my 2c Andrew -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of SM Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 5:28 PM To: [email protected]; AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion List Subject: Re: [AfriNIC-rpd] IPv4 Softlanding Proposal Update At 05:23 AM 11/27/2009, Mark Elkins wrote: >IPv4 Softlanding Proposal: > >Last paragraph on last page..... > >"None of these resources can be used outside of the African region" > >Would prefer this to read "No more than 10% of these resources can be >used outside of the African region - and only then to connect back to >resources within the African region". I suggest: No more than 10% of these resources can be used outside of the AfriNIC region. I don't think that we need to specify the "connect back". It's fine if you want to keep that in. Regards, -sm _______________________________________________ rpd mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd _______________________________________________ rpd mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
_______________________________________________ rpd mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
