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

[william at elan.net]

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Leo Bicknell wrote:

> While I admit this is my self serving position, I suggest if you want
> smaller allocations you get behind 2003-3, or a similar proposal.  You
> can have your own opinion on if it is American arrogance or that we
> really do know better, but I don't think you're going to find any real
> support for 2003-15 outside of Africa with the reasons given so far.

I do not believe opinion of the north american community on smaller 
allocations should be predominant issue in this case. I believe ARIN's 
operations right now in Africa should be considered as being temporary 
and public service to African community until such time as it can finish 
setup of its own ip registry. Since ARIN operates under consensus and 
based on support from the internet community, I believe ARIN's policies in 
African should be basedon consensus and support in African region and 
since there is very clear support for smaller allocation in Africa, we 
should allow them this.

Plus I think point about ARIN accomodating to allow better development of 
internet is important and I do think there are enough good reasons to believe
that portable allocations are either in case you go to peering exchange 
and can encorange competiton among upstrem providers which can futher 
reduce costs and allow for faster development of internet in the region.
(its not primary factor - Leo provide good overview of what real problems
are but its enough of a factor that it may help ISPs there and they 
clearly want it and are asking for it)

I also would like to ask if similar proposal has been put forward
for North African RIPE region (to reduce allocations to /22) and if so 
when and how it is being considered. In general I think it would be good 
idea for both RIPE and ARIN to begin developing common allocation policies 
for African regions it serves based on feedback received from those 
regions and to allow for either transition when Afrinic becomes RIR.

Separate but related issue has also been mentioned and that is reducing
costs of smaller allocations and assignments (current minimum maintanance
fee is $2500/year no matter how small ip block is), I believe ARIN Finance
Comitee should now (that we have two proposals for allocations & assignments
to be reduced to /22) begin to consider new level of payments for these
allocations and on the meeting should provide its proposal for new level
to be implemented in case policies are passed. It may even be good to 
consider doing proposals for two smaller levels (/21-/22 and /23-/24) in 
case as per policy proposal 2002-3 assignments are futher reduced. While 
its not appropriate for policy related discussion to dictate exact amounts,
my sence for it would be to reduce the amount of payments for /22 to 
about 2/3 of /20 and to about 1/2 for /24 (possibly $1500/year for /22 
and $1000/year for /24 to make for even numbers).

-- 
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william at elan.net