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

[Mury]

> procedures.  In turn this means only about 10% of the ISPs are capable of
> providing the higher service levels that portable address space makes
> possible.

Please excuse me for being dense today, but can you define "higher
service levels"?  In addition, would you please tell me why one can't
provide those "higher service levels" under current policies?

Is this an issue of not wanting to renumber?  If so, I think the
discussion on this policy is dead.

The *only* valid argument in the policy proposal I could find is this:

"Lack of adequate IPv4 address space may be slowing down the growth and
development of the Internet in Africa."

However there are no reasons given.  Why are smaller ISPs in Africa unable
to obtain IP space from upstream providers?  That question needs to be
answered and if there is a valid issue there it needs to be taken care of
at the source.  It shouldn't be circumvented by loosening requirements for
one geogrpahic area.

> Although it may be technically possible for a US company to setup an African
> shell company to be used in the US just so they can gain access to their own
> /22, this would be practically senseless given the much higher relative costs
> of running an ISP type business here and, more importantly, the much lower
> levels of service with international connectivity from here.  I think they'd
> be more likely to seek another line of business than even considering this
> route.

Agreed no US company is going to go through the hassle of setting up a
shell company in Africa.  Renumbering would be far easier.

Regards,

Mury