[ppml] Policy Proposal 2003-15: IPv4 Allocation Policy for the Africa Portion of the ARIN Region

[Mury]

Well said.

> I support 2002-3.  Actually, I supported several versions before
> it, and to this day think it should be both allocation and assignment.
> I believe you'll find a strong history of me supporting those
> efforts.
>
> Part of what bothers me here is that 6 or 12 months ago when 2002-3
> discussion was going on I don't recall many (or any, really) of the
> "Africa People" who have been supporting 2003-15 stepping up to
> voice their support.  There were proposals for a policy that did
> exactly what African's seem to want, and the 2002-3 proposal (which
> seems to not include assignments and allocations as desired), and
> yet no one came forward to help.
>
> Now that we're getting some traction on 2002-3, we're sidetracked
> by this Africa proposal.  At least two people have responded on
> list when I asked them to support 2002-3 instead (or Owen asked,
> as amended) that they felt 2003-15 had a better chance of passing,
> so they just wanted the local policy.  My inference was that they
> felt 2002-3 would be defeated because the "big bad backbones" in
> the US would never let it happen here, but they might be indifferent
> enough to let Africa get away with it.
>
> Indeed, that is somewhat my worry as well.  It is possible that
> 2003-15 would pass, and that people would use it passing to support
> defeating 2002-3.  I can think of a half dozen excuses (some of
> which have already been posted on the list) that might be used to
> support that line of thinking.
>
> There is a real problem that having both proposals in the system
> will split the vote.  I think the discussion here only supports
> that conclusion.  Clearly people have strong opinions one way or
> the other, and I see no clear majority.  The only way to win is to
> not split the vote, joining up and outvoting the "big bad backbones".
>
> Now, if we're going to join forces, it's going to be behind 2002-3,
> or a new proposal that is global, and includes allocations and
> assignments.  We're not going to join forces behind 2003-15, because
> it applies only to Africa, so for the people who've been working
> to get this in the US for some time now that would do absolutely
> no good.
>
> It is for this reason I would ask the African contingent to withdraw
> 2003-15, and either support 2002-3, or if having both types of
> membership is important draft a new proposal that is global and has
> both assignments and allocations.
>
> As long as we have both we're going to get bogged down in the
> global-vs-local us-vrs-africa big-bad-backbone-vrs-small-nice-guy
> wars and never win.  There are some valid opinions and some invalid
> opinions on both sides in each of those discussions, let's just avoid
> them, work together, and get something that actually helps _all_
> of us.
>
> --
>        Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
>         PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
> Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
>