Re: [address-policy-wg] IPv4 policy document and request forms updated

[Jeff Williams <]

Kurt and all,

Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>         Jeff,
>
> On 2004-10-29, at 13.17, Jeff Williams wrote:
>
> >  I understand that every region has different policies.  However
> > isn't AFriNIC serviced via ARIN?  And as such if all other
> > RIR's have distinct policies, as well as distinct policy determination
> > practices and/or policies for making policy determinations than
> > it would seem logical that in AFriNIC's case it should have the
> > same minimal allocation policy as ARIN does.  If not, than I
> > and still trying to understand why not, and than secondly what
> > are the criterion for determining policy(s) are used that justifies
> > a different minimal allocation policy for AFriNIC vs ARIN
> > in this instance other than AFriNIC just asking for a different
> > minimal allocation in an open and transparent manner.  Is
> > therefore by just asking, a minimal allocation policy for AFriNIC
> > also applicable to other RIR's?  If not, why not?  If so, than
> > is there any structure by which any allocation or other policies
> > determined by.
>
> I think that you should at least
>
> a) Follow Gert's advice and read up on the documentation and
> discussions that led to this decision in the first place. See mail
> archives and minutes from previous address-policy WG meetings.

  I have done so and was from time to time an active participant
in regards to the email forums.  See archives.

>
>
> b) Please read up on the service regions of the RIRs and the history of
> AfriNIC.

  Also done so and I like to think I have kept pretty current.

>
>
> You mail above is simply so out of the blue it's hard to reply to
> without giving you a full training on RIRs.

  Had the training myself.  But I can understand that what I am
asking may facilitate a more in depth answer.  However I would
have to wonder why to a certain degree, as the methods don't
seem to be very comprehensive as to policy determination
in respect to how and what the determination factors are,
and if or when the may change, so as to than justify a
change in policy for each or only some RIR's especially
on a limited resource such as IPv4...

 What I am getting is that most if not all of the policies regarding
any allocation aspect of IPv4 are more politically driven with the
cloak of openness and transparency and a lack or structure for
policy determination that is or should be equitable regarding
IPv4 as it is a restricted resource...

>
>
> - - kurtis -
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP 8.1
>
> iQA/AwUBQYIRUKarNKXTPFCVEQKPqwCbBOwTLNzOOi6w65hXaHmbghX5B2gAoPZU
> 9Eak66R0yY4KzKBpc7PdPeoZ
> =6nRu
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@localhost
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827