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

[Owen DeLong]

--On Thursday, October 2, 2003 10:26 AM +0200 Byron Sorgdrager 
<bs at lantic.net> wrote:

> The way I understand policy 2002-3, is it's design is to give smaller
> ISP's in  North America some relief. (This would also impact on the
> African Region of  ARIN).
>
Sort of.  2002-3 will actually give no permanent relief to ISPs.  It 
provides
only for assignments to end users from ARIN, and does not facilitate
allocations to ISPs.

> I know what the smaller ISP's go through (from an African perspective of
> course), so in this sense I would support the proposal.
>
> As Calvin Browne mentioned, I don't have ENOUGH of a grasp on how/what
> the  American Internet politics are like, but I do understand the plight
> of the  "little guy"....
>
Good... That is a very good start.  Now, if we can extend that understanding
to realize that 2002-3 provides good relief for end users, but, only
marginal/questionable relief for small(er) ISPs, we get a step closer.
Then, the next step is to realize that small(er) ISPs have asked for and
tried to get policy for allocations.  Indeed, at the last ARIN meeting
and the previous ARIN meeting, there were a number of proposals very
similar to 2003-15, but, for all of ARIN.  These proposals all got rolled
by the AC into 2002-3.  For various reasons, and, with much debate, the
AC decided to restrict 2002-3 to assignments, while, many of the comments
called for allocations and assignments.  That is why 2003-15 as is would
disenfranchise those who have supported allocations for so long.  That is
why I cannot abide it unless it is all-ARIN policy.

> Based on this understanding alone, I would support 2002-3. But I also
> support  2003-15, since it directly impacts on African ISP's...
>
Cool.  Hopefully by applying the above expanded understanding you will
come to realize the need to expand the scope of 2003-15.

> If BOTH can get passed, we ALL win ! I don't however see that 2002-3 and
> 2003-15 should be linked in any way.
>
They shouldn't.  However, in some peoples minds, they probably will be.
However, 2003-15 as is will disenfranchise those ISPs that have been
struggling for smaller allocations because it comes at exactly the same
time the AC has taken their request off the table by rolling out 2002-3
without allocation and not producing a corresponding micro-allocation
policy.  It is unfortunate that this is the case.  If 2003-15 had been
initially proposed for all of ARIN, I think that would have been a good
thing.  Since it is the way it is, regardless of the intent of the group
proposing it, it _WILL_ disenfranchise a significant portion of ARIN
membership without amendment.

> Any other takers for helping not just ourselves, but the Americans as
> well  (since they ARE trying to help us in return) ?
>
> One last question though, is it too late to add another proposal ? Once
> that  would include maybe a combination of the best parts out of both
> proposals?  (just thinking of increasing all of our chances to get what
> we want/need  passed without delay)
>
It is too late to get such a thing on the agenda for this meeting.  Policies
have to be published for discussion 30 days prior to the meeting as I
understand it.  The AC may correct me here.


Thanks, Byron.

Owen