ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZAA
1
Item number
DescriptionStatus QuoSoft-landing BIS suggestingSoft-landing Overhaul suggestingCo-Chairs' Observations and Recommendations
2
1Max allocation/assignment for Soft-landing Phase 1Needs-based up to /13Needs-based up to /18Needs-based up to /10The community agreed to move this from the /15 in initial BIS draft to needs-based up to /18
3
2Max allocation/assignment for Soft-landing Phase 2Needs-based to maximum of /22Needs-based to maximum of /22The status quo definition of /22 maximum should be maintained as this is a size that caters for the needs of a reasonable number of AFRINIC members (using present statistics).
4
3Strategic Reserve for unforeseen/12 from the final /8NoneNoneThe community is largely in agreement that there is no justification for "unforeseen" IPv4 reservations at this point. Co-chairs recommend that the /12 strategic reserve for "unforeseen" be repurposed for "New Entrants, IPv6 Transition, Critical Infrastructure and others".

Specific details of the quantity of address space to be reserved for each sub-component shall be defined in separate policy proposals.
5
4
Strategic Reserve for transition to IPv6
None/13 from the final /8??The community sees reason in making provision for v6 transition. Co-chairs propose to have this covered by the strategic reserve described above.
6
5
Starting point for Soft-landing Phase 2
final /11/11 of non-reserved space from the last /8final /13To avoid foreseeable back and forth, the status quo Phase 2 of the existing soft-landing policy (final non-reserved /11) shall be maintained.
7
6New entrant provisionUndefinedreserve /14 from final /11final /13The community sees reason in making provision for new entrants. Co-chairs propose to have this covered by the repurposed strategic reserve described above.
8
7Critical Infrastructure reservation/16 for IXPs peering LAN,
/16 for IXP management LAN		/16UndefinedCommunity is not particular about this as IXPs which appear to be the only infrastructures with agreed criticality have been catered for in a ratified policy. Co-chairs propose to have this covered by the repurposed strategic reserve described above (if any critical entities have been missed).
9
7.1
Entities covered by Critical infrastructure reservation
UndefinedICANN root DNS ops, ccTLDs, Geo gTLD, IANA RIRs (APNIC, AFRINIC,ARIN,RIPE NCC,LACNIC)
(IXPs not included; TLDs covered are limited)
UndefinedCo-chairs recommend that definition of any entities with reservations in the strategic reserve be covered by separate policy proposals.
10
8
Imposition of "IPv6 before IPv4" during Soft Landing
NoneHow will this be measured or enforced?NoneThe community does not see this as necessary/critical since there is no evidence to suggest that imposition of v6 resources will lead to deployment of v6. While it may appear harmless, the proponents fail to define any strategy for measurement or enforcement of compliance. Co-chairs recommend that this be put forward as a separate policy proposal.
11
In summary, the following actions are seen as achievable:

1. Update nomenclature and definition of the /12 "Strategic Reserve for Unforseen" so that it can be used for "New Entrants, IPv6 Transition requests, Critical Infrastructure and other needs" as may be defined by subsequent policies in relation to soft-landing reservations.

2. Reduce the maximum allocation in Soft-Landing Phase 1 from /13 to /18

3. Require separate policy proposals to define entities and reservations to be serviced by the strategic reserve. Multiple proposals defining the same entities should be discouraged to prevent stalemated discussions.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100