[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: afrinic-rpd
Subject: Re: Fwd: [AFRINIC-rpd] Latest version of the policy AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-03
From: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji () gmail ! com>
Date: 2013-06-24 18:30:13
Message-ID: CAD_dc6jHP9HvDEVkYy_DK=BVa4_5zo=SA4f=iyzqLYsq9EM6qw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
Hello Christian,
On 24 Jun 2013 12:18, "Bope Domilongo Christian" <christianbope@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Policy chair,
> The community need an advice and the way forward for this policy.
>
Thank you for your question, I will try to address your concern; You will
agree that there is a pdp process which I believe the Co-chairs and the
community is interested in following.
On the policy of the subject; we believe during the f2f in Lusaka the
particular policy had consensus to be moved to last call on the mailing
list after updating the few lines recommended to the authors by the
community present.
It is based on the existing PDP guideline that will make us proceed to last
call.
However, there is a discussion window after the last call and the Co-chairs
will observe the list and will honor discussion during that window as that,
and the f2f will guide us to deciding on the next action on the policy. I
have also quoted a relevant section below:
According to the Policy Development Process, Section 6.3:
++++++++
A final review of the draft policy is initiated by the Working Group
Chair(s) by sending an announcement to the Resource Policy
Discussion mailing list. The Last Call period shall be at least two
weeks. The Working Group Chair(s) shall evaluate the feedback
received during the Public Policy Meeting and during this period and
decide whether consensus has been achieved.
++++++++
Kind Regards
Seun for PDP
> Best Regards
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Jackson Muthili <jacksonmuthi@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Latest version of the policy
AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-03
> To: Andrew Alston <alston.networks@gmail.com>
> Cc: rpd <rpd@afrinic.net>
>
>
> Now that new version come up and clear in this last call we have more
> opposition than support.
>
> The policy go back to discuss at next Afrinic meeting?
>
> Policy Chair please give us your expert advise.
>
> I still oppose strongly this policy to get above this stage. Because
> all community still need to understand implication.
>
> Jack
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Andrew Alston
> <alston.networks@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Please see the proposed modified version of the policy as requested by
> > community consensus at the Zambian PDP Meeting.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> > 1) Summary of the Problem Being Addressed by this Policy Proposal
> > Given that the Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in Africa are
growing,
> > and that Internet access within these Higher Education Institutions is
> > critical to the educational experience of students, it is necessary to
> > provide sufficient address space to these HEIs to allow them to functio=
n
> > effectively. When we consider that such institutions are constantly
> > upgrading their Infrastructure and bandwidth to support technologies
which
> > are severely limited in environments using Network Address Translation
> > (NAT), we believe that it is important that HEIs desirous of public
address
> > space should have the ability to migrate away from NAT. Such migration
will
> > help promote technologies such as multicast and the convergence of
voice and
> > data networks, which will in turn drive down the costs within such
> > institutions.
> > By promoting the elimination of NATs, this proposal will also assist
HEIs in
> > their migration to IPv6, and in fact, to qualify under this proposal,
> > dual-stack and/or rollout of IPv6 at the qualifying institution is
> > mandatory.
> >
> > 2) Summary of How this Proposal Addresses the Problem
> > a) This proposal will simplify the allocation of address space to HEIs
by
> > detailing and simplifying the address justification criteria b) This
> > proposal recognises HEIs as end users, and removes the confusion
previously
> > seen where arguments have occurred as to the status of the applying
> > institution. c) This proposal helps to reduce the dependence of HEIs on
> > NATs, and is in line with AfriNIC's own policy of not promoting the
usage of
> > such translation mechanisms.. d) This proposal encourages the adoption
of
> > IPv6 by making the rollout of IPv6 a criterion for qualification under
this
> > proposal.
> >
> > 3) Proposal
> > Higher Education Institutions qualify for IP address space from AfriNIC
> > based on the sum of the number of registered students and employees on
their
> > campus.
> >
> > 3.1) To qualify for address space, Higher Education Institutions will
need
> > to apply as end users and provide the following documentation:
> > 3.1.1) Proof of Institution's registration/accreditation 3.1.2) Proof
of
> > the number of registered full time students 3.1.3) Proof of staff head
> > count.
> >
> > 3.2) This policy applies a ratio to a head count of campus users, where
the
> > number of campus users is calculated using a formula of full time
students +
> > full time employees + (part time students * 0.5)
> >
> > 3.3) In addition to the documentation specified in clause 3.1,
institutions
> > will need to provide details of planned/current IPv6 roll-outs,
including
> > committed time frames for the roll-out of IPv6.
> >
> > 3.4) For the purposes of this policy, the roll-out of IPv6 can only be
> > considered to be a true IPv6 roll-out, if IPv6 is extended to the edge
of
> > the network, beyond just the core/server infrastructure.
> >
> > 3.5) Under the policy, HEI shall be eligible to receive IPv4 resources
at a
> > ratio not less than 5 IPv4 addresses per campus user, where campus user
is
> > defined in 3.2).
> >
> > 3.6) While 3.5 defines a minimum accepted ratio for which the
justification
> > is clearly defined in 3.1, applications based on a ratio as high as 10:=
1
> > shall be given due consideration and should be approved unless the
> > justification for such increased ratio is believed by AfriNIC staff to
be
> > specious or fraudulent in nature.
> >
> > 3.7) While 3.5 defines a minimum ratio for which institutions shall be
> > eligible, where an institution believes that it requires less space tha=
n
> > defined by this ratio, a ratio of less than the
> > default specified in 3.5 may be requested.
> >
> > 3.8) HEIs will be classified as End Users under this policy, on
provision of
> > a duly authorised letter from the institution management stating that
> > address space allocated will not be used outside of the campus/academic
> > environment.
> >
> > 3.9) HEIs qualifying under this proposal will qualify for the same
academic
> > discounts that are applicable to any academic institution at the time o=
f
> > application.
> >
> > 3.10) Since any HEI that has a large base of registered students and
full
> > time staff, has to, by the very nature of their function, have
equipment on
> > campus, this policy dispenses for the need for a HEI to provide detaile=
d
> > proof of equipment and infrastructure.
> >
> >
> > Revision History (For all but the first draft)
> > Version 1 =96 Added 3.1.3 to include justification of employee count.
Added a
> > new point 3.2 and 3.4, meaning that sequential numbering changed, where
the
> > original 3.2 became 3.3, 3.4 became 3.5, 3.6 was a new point, meaning
> > original 3.6 -> 3.8 became 3.7 -> 3.9. Added 3.2 to define the
calculation
> > of head count to which the address ratio calculation is applied.
Modified
> > 3.5 to change the ratio from 1:3 to 1:5 as per requests from the RPD
list.
> > Added 3.6 to allow for allocations larger than the de-facto 1:5 ratio
upon
> > submission of additional documentation, while maintaining the need for
> > minimal justification if the ratio applied for did not exceed the 1:5
mark.
> > Version 2 - Added point 3.7 to allow for smaller applications.
Renumbered
> > 3.8 -> 3.10 (from 3.7 -> 3.9). Replaced the word "academic" with the
term
> > "Higher Education Institutions" where appropriate to make the policy
more
> > consistent
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rpd mailing list
> > rpd@afrinic.net
> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
> >
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Christian Bope Domilongo
> Gtalk : christianbope@gmail.com
> Msn : christianbope@hotmail.com
> Skype : christian.bope
> Phone : +243993005258
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd@afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
<p dir="ltr">Hello Christian,</p>
<p dir="ltr">On 24 Jun 2013 12:18, "Bope Domilongo Christian" <<a \
href="mailto:christianbope@gmail.com">christianbope@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br> \
><br> > Policy chair,<br>
> The community need an advice and the way forward for this policy.<br>
><br>
Thank you for your question, I will try to address your concern; You will agree that \
there is a pdp process which I believe the Co-chairs and the community is interested \
in following. </p> <p dir="ltr">On the policy of the subject; we believe during the \
f2f in Lusaka the particular policy had consensus to be moved to last call on the \
mailing list after updating the few lines recommended to the authors by the community \
present.<br>
It is based on the existing PDP guideline that will make us proceed to last call.<br>
However, there is a discussion window after the last call and the Co-chairs will \
observe the list and will honor discussion during that window as that, and the f2f \
will guide us to deciding on the next action on the policy. I have also quoted a \
relevant section below:</p>
<p dir="ltr">According to the Policy Development Process, Section 6.3:</p>
<p dir="ltr">++++++++<br>
A final review of the draft policy is initiated by the Working Group<br>
Chair(s) by sending an announcement to the Resource Policy<br>
Discussion mailing list. The Last Call period shall be at least two<br>
weeks. The Working Group Chair(s) shall evaluate the feedback<br>
received during the Public Policy Meeting and during this period and<br>
decide whether consensus has been achieved.<br>
++++++++</p>
<p dir="ltr">Kind Regards<br>
Seun for PDP<br>
> Best Regards<br>
><br>
><br>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
> From: Jackson Muthili <<a \
href="mailto:jacksonmuthi@gmail.com">jacksonmuthi@gmail.com</a>><br> > Date: \
Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:49 PM<br> > Subject: Re: [AFRINIC-rpd] Latest version of \
the policy AFPUB-2013-GEN-001-DRAFT-03<br> > To: Andrew Alston <<a \
href="mailto:alston.networks@gmail.com">alston.networks@gmail.com</a>><br> > \
Cc: rpd <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br> ><br>
><br>
> Now that new version come up and clear in this last call we have more<br>
> opposition than support.<br>
><br>
> The policy go back to discuss at next Afrinic meeting?<br>
><br>
> Policy Chair please give us your expert advise.<br>
><br>
> I still oppose strongly this policy to get above this stage. Because<br>
> all community still need to understand implication.<br>
><br>
> Jack<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Andrew Alston<br>
> <<a href="mailto:alston.networks@gmail.com">alston.networks@gmail.com</a>> \
wrote:<br> > > Hi All,<br>
> ><br>
> > Please see the proposed modified version of the policy as requested by<br>
> > community consensus at the Zambian PDP Meeting.<br>
> ><br>
> > Thanks<br>
> ><br>
> > Andrew<br>
> ><br>
> > 1) Summary of the Problem Being Addressed by this Policy Proposal<br>
> > Given that the Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in Africa are \
growing,<br> > > and that Internet access within these Higher Education \
Institutions is<br> > > critical to the educational experience of students, it \
is necessary to<br> > > provide sufficient address space to these HEIs to allow \
them to function<br> > > effectively. When we consider that such institutions \
are constantly<br> > > upgrading their Infrastructure and bandwidth to support \
technologies which<br> > > are severely limited in environments using Network \
Address Translation<br> > > (NAT), we believe that it is important that HEIs \
desirous of public address<br> > > space should have the ability to migrate \
away from NAT. Such migration will<br> > > help promote technologies such as \
multicast and the convergence of voice and<br> > > data networks, which will in \
turn drive down the costs within such<br> > > institutions.<br>
> > By promoting the elimination of NATs, this proposal will also assist HEIs \
in<br> > > their migration to IPv6, and in fact, to qualify under this \
proposal,<br> > > dual-stack and/or rollout of IPv6 at the qualifying \
institution is<br> > > mandatory.<br>
> ><br>
> > 2) Summary of How this Proposal Addresses the Problem<br>
> > a) This proposal will simplify the allocation of address space to HEIs \
by<br> > > detailing and simplifying the address justification criteria b) \
This<br> > > proposal recognises HEIs as end users, and removes the confusion \
previously<br> > > seen where arguments have occurred as to the status of the \
applying<br> > > institution. c) This proposal helps to reduce the dependence \
of HEIs on<br> > > NATs, and is in line with AfriNIC's own policy of not \
promoting the usage of<br> > > such translation mechanisms.. d) This proposal \
encourages the adoption of<br> > > IPv6 by making the rollout of IPv6 a \
criterion for qualification under this<br> > > proposal.<br>
> ><br>
> > 3) Proposal<br>
> > Higher Education Institutions qualify for IP address space from AfriNIC<br>
> > based on the sum of the number of registered students and employees on \
their<br> > > campus.<br>
> ><br>
> > 3.1) To qualify for address space, Higher Education Institutions will \
need<br> > > to apply as end users and provide the following documentation:<br>
> > 3.1.1) Proof of Institution's registration/accreditation 3.1.2) Proof \
of<br> > > the number of registered full time students 3.1.3) Proof of staff \
head<br> > > count.<br>
> ><br>
> > 3.2) This policy applies a ratio to a head count of campus users, where \
the<br> > > number of campus users is calculated using a formula of full time \
students +<br> > > full time employees + (part time students * 0.5)<br>
> ><br>
> > 3.3) In addition to the documentation specified in clause 3.1, \
institutions<br> > > will need to provide details of planned/current IPv6 \
roll-outs, including<br> > > committed time frames for the roll-out of \
IPv6.<br> > ><br>
> > 3.4) For the purposes of this policy, the roll-out of IPv6 can only be<br>
> > considered to be a true IPv6 roll-out, if IPv6 is extended to the edge \
of<br> > > the network, beyond just the core/server infrastructure.<br>
> ><br>
> > 3.5) Under the policy, HEI shall be eligible to receive IPv4 resources at \
a<br> > > ratio not less than 5 IPv4 addresses per campus user, where campus \
user is<br> > > defined in 3.2).<br>
> ><br>
> > 3.6) While 3.5 defines a minimum accepted ratio for which the \
justification<br> > > is clearly defined in 3.1, applications based on a ratio \
as high as 10:1<br> > > shall be given due consideration and should be approved \
unless the<br> > > justification for such increased ratio is believed by \
AfriNIC staff to be<br> > > specious or fraudulent in nature.<br>
> ><br>
> > 3.7) While 3.5 defines a minimum ratio for which institutions shall be<br>
> > eligible, where an institution believes that it requires less space \
than<br> > > defined by this ratio, a ratio of less than the<br>
> > default specified in 3.5 may be requested.<br>
> ><br>
> > 3.8) HEIs will be classified as End Users under this policy, on provision \
of<br> > > a duly authorised letter from the institution management stating \
that<br> > > address space allocated will not be used outside of the \
campus/academic<br> > > environment.<br>
> ><br>
> > 3.9) HEIs qualifying under this proposal will qualify for the same \
academic<br> > > discounts that are applicable to any academic institution at \
the time of<br> > > application.<br>
> ><br>
> > 3.10) Since any HEI that has a large base of registered students and \
full<br> > > time staff, has to, by the very nature of their function, have \
equipment on<br> > > campus, this policy dispenses for the need for a HEI to \
provide detailed<br> > > proof of equipment and infrastructure.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > Revision History (For all but the first draft)<br>
> > Version 1 – Added 3.1.3 to include justification of employee count. Added \
a<br> > > new point 3.2 and 3.4, meaning that sequential numbering changed, \
where the<br> > > original 3.2 became 3.3, 3.4 became 3.5, 3.6 was a new point, \
meaning<br> > > original 3.6 -> 3.8 became 3.7 -> 3.9. Added 3.2 to \
define the calculation<br> > > of head count to which the address ratio \
calculation is applied. Modified<br> > > 3.5 to change the ratio from 1:3 to \
1:5 as per requests from the RPD list.<br> > > Added 3.6 to allow for \
allocations larger than the de-facto 1:5 ratio upon<br> > > submission of \
additional documentation, while maintaining the need for<br> > > minimal \
justification if the ratio applied for did not exceed the 1:5 mark.<br> > > \
Version 2 - Added point 3.7 to allow for smaller applications. Renumbered<br> > \
> 3.8 -> 3.10 (from 3.7 -> 3.9). Replaced the word "academic" with \
the term<br> > > "Higher Education Institutions" where appropriate to \
make the policy more<br> > > consistent<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > rpd mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
> > <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd</a><br>
> ><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> rpd mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> -- <br>
> Best Regards<br>
> Christian Bope Domilongo<br>
> Gtalk : <a href="mailto:christianbope@gmail.com">christianbope@gmail.com</a><br>
> Msn : <a href="mailto:christianbope@hotmail.com">christianbope@hotmail.com</a><br>
> Skype : christian.bope<br>
> Phone : +243993005258<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> rpd mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd</a><br>
><br>
</p>
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
rpd@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic