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

William Stucke William at zanet.co.za
Wed Oct 1 05:20:31 EDT 2003


Leo Bicknell said: -

> 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.

The answer to that is very simple. I, for one, hadn't heard of this list,
and wasn't aware that there was a possible method for me to influence ARIN
policy. That changed two weeks ago, when we held the AfriNIC session at
iWeek, which included an ARIN meeting.

> There is a real problem that having both proposals in the system
will split the vote.

Really? I know very little about ARIN politics, but I had no idea it was a
"one horse race" where only *ONE* proposal may be accepted at a time. If
that's not the case, then the issue of "splitting the vote" doesn't arise.

> 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.

My understanding of 2002-3 is that it does NOT include both allocations AND
assignments, so it still doesn't do what you want.

Owen DeLong asked: -

> However, is there an AfriNIC discussion list equivalent to PPML?

Yes. It's called AfriNIC-Discuss. That's how many of us heard about the PPML
list. See attached notification. (Are attachments allowed on this list?)

Regards,

William Stucke
ZAnet Internet Services (Pty) Ltd
+27 11 465 0700
William at zanet.co.za

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net]On Behalf Of Leo
Bicknell
Sent: 01 October 2003 02:56
To: ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2003-15: IPv4 Allocation Policy for
the Africa Portion of the ARIN Region


In a message written on Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 01:02:52AM +0200, William
Stucke wrote:
> RIR		MIN SIZE	ELIGIBILITY
> APNIC		/20		/22
> RIPE		/20		/22
> LACNIC	/20		/22
> ARIN		/20		/20
>
> In addition, in terms of "inter-registry policy coordination", RIPE
> currently makes /22 allocations for their "Micro Members" and only
requires
> a demonstrated need for a /22, I believe. AfriNIC intends doing the same.
> Why is ARIN out of step?

I've never thought to ask the question before, but I agree 100% that
ARIN is out of step, and wonder why.

In a message written on Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 01:47:07AM +0200, William
Stucke wrote:
> Africans, and AfriNIC members, are unanimous in supporting 2003-15. I
> haven't heard a single African refuse to support 2002-3. I'm happy to
record
> my support for 2002-3 hereby, but do rather wonder why it's taken so long
to
> get through the system. I haven't heard a convincing argument that
> supporting one will harm the other. Why, oh why, do (some few vocal) North
> Americans refuse to support 2003-15?

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

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 2003/07/24
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: "Theo Kramer" <theo at flame.co.za>
Subject: [Fwd: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2003-15: IPv4 Allocation Policy forthe Africa Portion of the ARIN Region]
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 12:20:37 +0200
Size: 7048
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20031001/d240c600/attachment-0001.mht>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list