Your IP address is


25th September- Internet Governance in Africa and Policy Makers i) Welcome and Opening - Adiel Akplogan Adiel Akplogan welcomed all the attendees to the Internet Governance in Africa and Policy Makers day. He said that Internet Governance was an important debate for internet development in Africa particularly regarding issues of access. He said that an initial session about internet governance issues was held in Abuja (during AfriNIC-6) that was mostly attended by technical people. ii) Setting the Scene - Rosey Sekese (Deputy Director General, Department of Communications - ZA) She noted the contribution of Africa and the Internet community in Africa and commented on some of the issues discussed at the WSIS Geneva meetings regarding the unequal distribution of the benefits of Information Technology. She discussed some of the activities of the Department of Communications such as hosting the IGA on the Kigali protocol and facilitating broadband initiatives in Southern and Eastern Africa. She said that in order to work towards lower costs of communication on the African continent, countries need to collaborate and partnerships need to be formed between public, private and international stakeholders. She said that, while Africa is a late starter, there are signs of progress even as there are ways to go. She viewed coming in late as an opportunity to leapfrog older technologies for internet provision. Regarding technologies, she saw mobile networks as a key driver for next generation services and urged the speedy deployment of IPv6 for increased access to internet number resources on the African continent. She stressed the need for greater security and privacy against the expansion of the internet and thanked everyone for attending and saw the meeting as preparation for the IGF meeting in November. iii) Global Overview of the Internet Governance Structure - Markus Kummer & Anne Rachel Inne Markus Kummer started by underlining the importance of establishing a dialogue between policy makers and stakeholders especially for internet infrastructure such as the management of the DNS and internet numbering resources. He recalled that Vint Cerf described the internet as a big ecosystem and a symbiosis of different organisations that required the need for collaboration. He noted the role of the UN in facilitating dialogue by bringing actors to a neutral environment. He said he was interested in hearing from policy-makers in Africa about their priorities. Finally he said that access is usually a concern for developing countries but that once issues of access are solved the next concern is about security. Anne Rachel Inne talked about the role of ICANN in internet governance and in Africa. She said that the internet is an ecosystem with social, political and technological implications and that ICANN is an organisation that is involved in the technical administration of the internet. She described the global view of internet governance and organisations responsible for different pieces of it. She explained the workings of the RIR system and described the different committees within Africa and how they interact with the internet administrative system. To view the presentation, click here. v) Participation and Contribution to the Internet Governance Forum – Dr Nii Quaynor Dr Nii Quaynor said it was good to see multi-stakeholders reach the level of the IGF. He stressed the importance of participation for African countries because he said that what is done at the national level impacts at the global level and that on average African policy-makers were not responsive or participatory at the global level. He said there was a need to create policy and institutions in African countries to tackle emerging internet issues such as cyber crime and fraud and that it was important not to spend time deliberating otherwise the continent would again be left behind. He ended by saying openness should be top of the agenda over and above access and security. iv) The role of GAC in the ICANN System – Rachida Jouhari There was a presentation by Rachida, an AfriNIC Board Member, about the role of the GAC (Government Advisory Committee) in the structure of the ICANN, and various roles were mentioned such as providing advice on political issues when dealing with governments, intellectual property rights and international law. It was mentioned that the GAC is also involved in formation of some delegations about ccTLD and DNS management. The meetings schedule of the GAC was mentioned, along with the procedure of electing the president, members and GAC country representatives. There was also mention of the issues and status around the .xxx domain. To view the presentation, click here. v) Issues related to Internet Governance in Africa Region – Moderated by Pierre Dandjinou Pierre Dandjinou introduced the session about the African perspective on Internet Governance (IG), and mentioned that Africa needs to have a local forum to deal with our IG issues from home - and that we must prepare to participate on the international IG scene after investing a lot of capital into ICT initiatives that promote an African Internet. - ccTLD Management – Michuki Mwangi Michuki Mwangi from the Kenyan Internet Exchange Point talked about ccTLD best practices, and gave key points of interest on how to successfully run a functional ccTLD, from planning to the political, policy, financial, managerial and engineering/network design outlook. To view the presentation, click here. - Root Servers – The Facts – Alain Aina Alain Aina gave a presentation about the tips and tricks of setting up and deploying root servers, and some hints to useful information about root server management. He mentioned that only "copies" are being deployed, and that technical help can be easily availed online about how to do that. However, some people mentioned the need for Africa to have a need for a local internet and local traffic for these root servers to be more useful. To view the presentation, click here. vi) Building Internet Exchange Points in Africa – Key Factor for Internet Development Viv Padayatchy talked about building IXPs in Africa. He talked about some uses of IXPs that are usually ignored, like being able to setup a Voice (over IP) network, CCTV surveillance, e-banking and telemedicine and videoconferencing. He mentioned the need for African IXPs to interconnect with each other given the prohibitive costs of international bandwidth both via VSAT and fibre (SAFE/SAT3). He stressed that IXPs are not only meant for ISPs but any other entity that plans to exchange traffic locally with other entities can connect to an IXP, citing banks, cellular operators, local revenue authorities, universities and others. He mentioned that it would be good for ISPs to bundle their products in such a way that a customer requiring only local content should be able to pay only for that, as it is done in many developed countries. To view the presentation, click here. vii) Internet Security in Africa: Call for Cooperation among Policy Makers - Pierre Ouedraogo Pierre Ouedraogo introduced the security issue by mentioning that Security has always been questioned since early civilisation and therefore it was predictable that Internet will also face this problem. He addressed the African perspective and possible solutions. He also addressed the issue at a global level. Among others, his recommendations were: - Enforced Legal framework, - Numerical trust for development, - Capacity building, - Contribution to global efforts and - Technological alertness. To view the presentation, click here. viii) AfriNIC - a tool available to policy makers for efficient participation to the Internet Governance issue – Sunday Folayan Sunday Folayan opened the presentation by giving a definition of the term ‘Internet Governance’. He also gave a description of the terms ‘Internet Resources’, IP address, ASN and Names. He highlighted that Internet Governance goes beyond the management of IP address and includes issues dealt with by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). He also mentioned that it also includes other significant public policy issues, such as critical Internet resources, the security and safety of the Internet, and developmental aspects and issues pertaining to the use of the Internet. He listed the epistemic community values. He also made an analysis of the evolution of the Internet Structure from the past to the future. He also demonstrated the importance of Internet Development in the African region. He presented the structure for resource allocation at global level and how AfriNIC can represent the Africa region, one of these being the existing Policy Development Process of AfriNIC. To view the presentation, click here. viii) Round Table: Internet Governance Forum and Policy Makers in Africa: Expectation and Meaningful participation The round table was chaired by Viv Padayatchy and members were: Coura Fall, Rosey Sekese, Adiel Akplogan and Markus Kummer. The Chair opened the floor for Discussion. Questions and discussions were as follows: Coura Fall mentioned the role of APC as being one to promote access to internet in a fair and equitable manner. Regulators, have an important role play to facilitate Internet access in the African continent such as infrastructure, interconnection and convergence. She asked if AfriNIC is ready to collaborate with other African internet players such as CRASA, AfriSPA address the issue critical internet resources and resource management. Adiel Akplogan mentioned that Regional Cooperation was already happening but the support from Policy Makers is an important factor. He mentioned that Policy makers have been invited individually to assist to the AfriNIC 7 meeting. Markus Kummer discussed the roles and expectations from the IGF and noted that IGF is a platform for sharing of practices. He also mentioned that IGF do not have a decisive power implement actions but has moral power to enforce actions. Rosey Sekese mentioned that some issues were already mentioned by other speakers. She mentioned that as compared to IGF the WRC is more result oriented explaining the higher level of participation at the WRC. She raised the question as how to make the IGF more result oriented. She also mentioned the need to address the local content of Africa. She also mentioned that the focus should also be on monitoring of activities to ensure a more result oriented collaboration. The Chair opened the floor for comments: Pierre Dandjinou asked what can be done to enhance a more result oriented collaboration with IGF. The following was suggested: Clearly defines its needs and requirements. Taking into account poverty , development Monitoring: Make an evaluation of the activities and provides a clear direction on the current achievements. African countries need to share information and experience eg South Africa should share its experience with the other countries. End Users should be more engaged in the whole policy making process. It was also noted the major issues of the African continent are that: -There is no sufficient information sharing among the countries -The cross countries legislations is a barrier to infrastructure development -Lack of participation from the African continent in international discussion forums. The importance of knowledge sharing at local and regional level was highlighted. The possibility of AfriNIC to be that platform for information sharing for Africa was discussed. The Chair mentioned that despite the fact that AfriNIC is now well structured AfriNIC is still a young institution, and had limited resources. As such, it might be difficult for AfriNIC to host this platform. This view was shared by Adiel Akplogan. He however mentioned that AfriNIC can play a facilitator role with the support of the regulatory bodies. Badru Ntege said that the importance of addressing the issue at the ‘African Continent’ level. It was noted that Africa has certain local specificities that need to be addressed separately at the global level. Ann Rachel Inne mentioned the importance of engaging Policy makers in the discussions. It was also noted that there is often a change in the Policy Makers and as such, the Policy makers need to be re educated constantly. Ray Platz mentioned that this problem was common to the other continents and it was suggested to address the issue with Government official at a lower level of the hierarchy. These officials are more deemed to stay longer and ensure follow up of actions. ix) Round Table: Enhance cooperation and participation of policy maker in Africa to Internet governance debate. The table was chaired by Sunday Folayan and the members were Desire Karyabwite, Pierre Ouedraogo, Dawit Bekele and Nii Quaynor. Desire Karyabwite presented his apologies for the absence of Dr Toure and Mohamed Al Basheer who were taken up with other meetings. He talked about the following: - ITU fully supports AfriNIC in its actions and activities. ITU will support AfriNIC through financial means and holding of joint activities. - ITU has a new team that has been elected last year and one of the main emphasis of this ITU team is strong collaboration with all the stakeholders in Africa and also in other regions. - As far as Internet Management is concerned, ITU has a clear mandate defined by ITU members. - ITU has assisted countries with policies and now the focus is mainly on capacity building. In this context, ITU is satisfied with the AfriNIC IPv6 workshop. - For ACCESS, ITU has launched a special initiative next month namely the Connect Africa Summit that will be held in Rwanda to set up infrastructure backbone for Africa. - There meeting will also address the Cyber security issue to have security at all levels based on 5 pillars: legal framework, Technical aspects, organisational structures, capacity building and international cooperation. - ITU strongly supports initiatives from organisations. Dawit Bekele mentioned the following: - The reason for insufficient engagement from policy makers were identified as follows: - Government has limited financial resources; Government may have other priorities such as health and access to water. - Policy Makers should however be interested in the development of Telecommunication technologies in particular Internet as it triggers economic growth. Studied has shown the direct relationship of the development in Africa and internet development. - It was noted that Internet development was made difficult by barriers such as security, openness and language diversity. Pierre Ouedraogo mentioned the following: - Policy Makers sometimes cannot respond to the high speed of technological innovations. This has made the involvement of Policy Makers difficult and may explain the absence Policy makers at some important forums. Therefore institutions and governmental bodies need to develop a mechanism to allow the private sectors to catch with those technological advances. It belongs to everybody to demonstrate the willingness for Africa to meet those technological developments. Dr Nii Quaynor mentioned the following: - Tthe main issue was that Africa has not adopted the Internet (Internet penetration being 4% for Africa and Europe being 40%). Therefore priorities need to be changed and the real challenge should focus on building the African networks. This network development will involve several issues such as partnerships, capacity development, language diversity, interconnection between the countries. Alan Barrett mentioned the following: - Due to some monopoly situation for Internet Access in certain countries the development of this network can be difficult. In response to this comment, Rosey Sekese mentioned a few initiatives to address this issue such as end of monopoly by Telkom SA, the extension of the Kigali Protocol to other countries, harmonisation of protocol to interconnect the African countries. It was mentioned that SME should also be involved in this process as they are the key factor to economic growth. Didier Kla mentioned the following: - In the process of privatisation of internet providers, Government should provide a regulatory framework to ensure that there is no conflict of interest between the profit making institution and the objective to enhance Internet development Africa. - Nii Quaynor proposed to identify among the participants of the meeting the Critical Number resources: Results were as follows in order of priority: Access (33 votes) Security (7 votes), Diversity (3 votes), Openness (5 votes) Closing Remarks – Adiel Akplogan Adiel Akplogan thanked all the participants for their contribution. He re-instated AfriNIC’s determination to collaborate with all stakeholders i) Opening Addresses - Adiel Akplogan Adiel Akplogan welcomed everyone to the IPv6 conference. He noted the issue of the exhaustion of the central pool of IPv4 addresses, AfriNIC's awareness campaign on IPv6 (v6 Mandela) and the need to move to IPv6. He said that there is a need for integrating the new technology in infrastructure to ensure scalability and security. He said collaboration is also vital because the internet is where it is today because of collaboration. He thanked the Department of Communications for their support of AfriNIC in its initial setup and in hosting the technical and engineering department. - Pierre Dandjinou Pierre Dandjinou said that the internet is more than a technological invention but also impacts on social and political spheres. He said the policy makers play a critical role in internet development in creating a regulatory environment because the technical staff was ready and willing to advance the internet in Africa. He thanked the Department of Communications for their support and the role they have played in internet initiatives in Africa. - The City Mayor of Durban, Councillor Obed Mlaba Councillor Obed Mlaba said that the discussion on ICT has come at the right time for Africa because there is a need for African countries to be global players in the realm of ICT. He said building communication infrastructure is important because often African countries have to go outside the continent in order to communicate with each other. He said it was important that African countries take responsibility for their own development if any sort of renaissance for the continent was to occur. - H.E. Ivy Cassaburri H.E. Ivy Cassaburri thanked the Mayor of Durban and AfriNIC for inviting her to the event. She agreed with the mayor the importance of taking control for the development of the African continent and taking it into the future. She discussed the commitments of the WSIS summits and said that it was necessary to turn the digital divide into a digital opportunity and that commitment on infrastructure was particularly needed. She said issues of access were important as well as security for those with access and privacy of the individual. Speaking about regulation, she said policy-making in South Africa was high among developing countries but that usage was low comparative to other countries and that beyond regulatory issues that the private sector also played a critical role in providing access. She said that beyond access African countries have to look at issues of diversity in terms of language in connecting communities. She also noted the importance of affordability and availability for providing internet access to communities. She spoke about the importance of creating enabling policy regimes for small and medium-sized enterprises since they were key drivers in providing affordable access. At the continental level she said the African Union was in deep discussion about infrastructural issues and that governments and the private sector must work together to build infrastructure. She said Africa was far behind in internet connectivity and discussed some of the inter-governmental initiatives such as the EASSY cable consortium and the setting up of a pan-African infrastructure fund that would be used to fund new undersea cables along the West African coast and connecting Africa to South America. On IPv6 she said it was important to embrace the future and commenting on her experience with analogue v/s digital spectrum said that the speed of technology moves so quickly that one can easily be left behind. Finally she stressed the need for a critical mass of skills to be developed and a transition plan to be formalised. ii) Ipv4 Exhaustion: Transitioning to IPv6 – Adiel A. Akplogan Adiel gave a presentation on the IPv4 exhaustion issue with the tentative dates for the exhaustion of the IANA free pool. He then talked about the situation in Africa and the solution of IPv6. He also mentioned what needs to be done by all stakeholders. To view the presentation, click here. iii) IPv6 in Africa: The Present Situation – Alain Aina Alain talked about the IPv6 situation in Africa, the prefixes which are being used by AfriNIC and the allocations made by AfriNIC in the region. He showed the distribution by the countries as well as the routing statistics He mentioned the challenges facing IPv6 deployment in the region. He also talked about the incentives which are being given by AfriNIC with regards to IPv6 To view the presentation, click here. iv) The Cost of not deploying IPv6 - Jordi P. Martinez In his presentation Jordi noticed that most of existing organisations are focusing their attention on the high cost that will be involved in IPv6 deployment. In fact Jordi is saying that even if there are costs related to training, network upgrade and dual stack implementation, IPv6 deployment should not be considered as too expensive. Training seems to take the biggest part of all the costs of IPv6 deployment. As they have already training plans for their employees in other fields companies should include the IPv6 training cost in their existing plan. Doing so will make them not considering ipv6 training cost as an extra cost. Upgrading network also should be planned while taking in consideration the fact that most of new equipments are IPv6 enabled. Deploying a dual-stack infrastructure should not be considered as very expensive. This means that the real cost of implementing dual-stack is at most the cost of one machine and the software used for that purpose. The author mentioned the cost of deploying NAT in an infrastructure and also the cost of new IPv4 as this is in his exhaustion period which will bring additional cost. He said also that the transition to IPv6 has started some time ago and many transition technologies are available. Some ISP can miss some revenues when their customers will realize that they can get better service from another ISP who has already deployed IPv6. In conclusion IPv6 deployment can cost less when efficiently planned. Not deploying it can cost much more when it will be too late. To view the presentation, click here. v) Optimizing 802.11 networks for IPv6 mobility - Hisham Ahmed Ibrahim Hisham noticed that the large increase in the number of mobile users and the need for wider coverage areas of communication has resulted in the need for high mobility with high quality of service. In his presentation he described how mobility is used and works with IPv6 and the kinds of communications exchanged between each component in the sample network. The proposed architecture for optimising 802.11 networks is based on IEEE recommendations and uses the protocol MIPv6. The main goal of this process is finding optimum architecture and obtaining the minimum percent of dropped packets in the network. From all the protocols used for testing the 802.11g gave the best result. The author presented also the results of some test to optimise VOIP architectures. The evaluation criteria used are: - Maximum number of wireless nodes, maintain a packet end-to-end delay ( ASN numbers are available on request since January 2007. The representation of these numbers is still on discussion. For the author what is important here is to note that the 32 bit is compatible with the 16 but ASN numbers. There is no need to throw out old routers or replace old 16 bits ASN numbers with the new 32 bits ASN. In term of functionality only local routers will need to support the 16 bits ASN, remote routers will support the 32 bits ASN. What has changed is the new BGP attributes AS4_PATH and AS4_AGGREGATOR. Philip Smith said also that some implementations already exist. These implementations are Quagga, OpenBGPd, JunOSE and RedBACK. Cisco also supports this since IOS-RX 3.4 release. Discussion: A speaker from the floor asked if he needs to get a new router. Philip further explained that if you have an existing 16-bit number you do not need to do anything, but if you are new and you are going to use a 32-bit ASN then, yes, you will. A speaker from the floor asked Philip to please spread this information so that people in Africa do not throw out their routers. Philip stated that nobody in this room will need to do anything, but in 2010 they will need to. To view the presentation, click here. xi) Reclaiming the legacy addresses - Leo Vegoda Class A addresses are commonly used in the international system of PDN (Public Data Networks). The main task in this reclaiming process is mapping this class A address to the X 121 addresses used in the X25 networks. In most cases one or two of these addresses are really assigned and only few of them are used in PDN networks. Leo explained that there were 984 addresses and that there were 29 contacts. He added that it took him personally about 100 hours of work for research and liaison for under 1000 addresses. He noted that the workload varied for the networks, ranging from 5 minutes to a few hours spread over a few days. He further noted that one organisation re-numbered their networks in order to tidy it up and hand them back. Leo summarised the workload as being 3 1/2 hours per registration. He added that this is a lot of work for low value addresses as it is difficult, however this does not mean that address space is not worth reclaiming. To view the presentation, click here. xii) Internet Routing Registry for Africa – Mark Elkins Mark explained that currently there is not a Routing registry for African and that presently double work is needed as double registering is required without an African Routing Registry, He explained that a routing registry was a place to define and store ones’ given resources, peering and transit relationships. He noted that two registry systems do not currently provide, and identified those as AfriNIC and LACNIC. He highlighted some issues and advantages of using AfriNIC for this, highlighting that there would be the downside of using more AfriNIC bandwidth. Mark noted the advantages that it should not matter where your registry is held, and that it allows others to see what networks/prefixes you can carry. He also noted that it would be of huge importance to keep the information up to date. To view the presentation, click here . Discussion: A speaker from the floor asked if Mark imagined that when two database is provided, that getting the LIRs address space current and updated will be difficult. Mark responded by saying that a lot of people are already keeping their information update. He noted that if you are peering at home within Africa it may not be the case. A speaker from the floor commented that the structure of the database is difficult for us to update as you need to extract the text and I think that perhaps you could make a friendly user interface that is easier for people to use. Mark noted that this is not necessary as at present you have web and mail. Frank noted that there will be a presentation later on MyAfriNIC which will further clarify this. To view the presentation, click here. xiii) Update from Anti-Spam WG – Jean Robert Hountomey Jean Robert Hountomey presented the outcome of the BoF which was held in Abuja during AfriNIC-6 (21 participants) and the one at AfriNIC-7 on the eve. He gave a report of the online discussions so far on the anti-spam mailing list. He also mentioned some areas of work which is required. To view the presentation, click here . xiv) Discussion on Open Policy Proposals – Hisham R. Rojoa The two global IPv4 exhaustion proposals were delivered today. 1) Global policy for the allocation of the remaining IPv4 address space, click here. 2) JPNIC proposal, click here. There was consensus that something needs to be done. There was consensus that there should be equal allocation amongst the RIRs. Both policies were then submitted for a show of hands to the community to see if there was consensus on the proposals. For the first policy when called for a show of hands there were 9 hands in favour. There was a call for a show of hands for the JPNIC proposal and there were 5 hands in favour. When asked who is against both proposals there was 1 response. It was determined that the first proposal reached consensus, but would be referred to the mailing list to determine consensus on the value of N. In relation to the first proposal there was a call for a show of hands for the end count. N = 1- 6 hands N = 2 - 6 hands N = 3 - 0 hands N = 4 - 0 hands N = 5 - 0 hands This policy is now going to the mailing list for further discussion to determine N = ? To view the presentation, click here. xv) MyAfriNIC Presentation – Frank Nnebe He presented the new portal and mentioned that there were main objectives were: Simple, graphical, user-friendly interface; Member functionality in one place; Provide enhanced service and support Ensure seamless integration with WHOIS. He gave an update of the present portal and highlighted the different problems and difficulties that members may encounter. He demonstrated how MyAfriNIC is a solution to the various issues. He presented the different functionalities which includes among others: member., account management, organisation information, contact information management, user administration, notifications, billing , on line payment, resource management He concluded by mentioning that My AfriNIC is a user-friendly Web-based interface that enables AfriNIC members to manage their account, information and resources with enhanced service and support. To view the presentation, click here. One speaker from the floor asked to clarify how the system was more user friendly. Unfortunately, due to some connectivity issue, the demo had to be postponed to the following day. 28th September- AfriNIC Plenary II i) Discussion on Open Policy Proposals - Policy Development Process Alan provided an overview of the proposed Policy Development Process. Alan noted that there are two slightly different versions of this proposal, clarifying that the mailing list version is the most recent (not the paper handout). To view the presentation, click here. Discussion: Ernest queried the 60 days for staff implementation, he expressed his concern that some policies may take more than 60 days so policies should be looked at on a case by case basis. Alan agreed that the 60 day implementation would depend on tools, etc that may be needed in order to implement a policy, he also expressed some concern regarding the Board meeting timeframe, noting that presently the board meet every two months. A speaker from the floor expressed his concern regarding membership suggesting we need a minimum of three people from the community to participate so that when one of the members is also the proposer, there is also opportunity for discussion between the other members. He then wished to clarify the use of the term consensus, noting that the policy later uses the term majority, and this was inconsistent. Ray Plzak, ARIN - Ray noted that the ARIN region perform an impact analysis on implementation for each proposal which identifies software, hardware and human resources needed for each policy. He added that the outcome of this analysis determines the implementation time. Philip Smith commented that he mostly liked this proposal, noting that it is similar to PDPs in other regions. He did, however, note that the 30 day board meeting and 60 day implementation could be problematic. He also commented that he believed there needed to be clearer definition of consensus. Jordi Palet commented that the board should include the proposals on their agenda item to ensure that the 30 day period was met. He added that he had previously posted comments and a possible definition of consensus on the mailing list,
up dns_supportup RPKI_projectup root_serverup nro