[address-policy-wg] Proposal 2010-2
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Proposal 2010-2
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Proposal 2010-2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Chris Grundemann
cgrundemann at gmail.com
Mon Nov 1 21:45:44 CET 2010
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 09:19, Richard Hartmann <richih.mailinglist at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 15:52, Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com> wrote: > >> The only true soft-landing solution is to tie IPv6 deployment directly >> to IPv4 allocation. Organizations which are not deploying IPv6 along >> with IPv4 in their networks are not efficiently utilizing their IPv4 >> addresses and should not be allowed to get more. > > Quoth the proposal: > > d) Allocations will only be made to LIRs if they have already received > an IPv6 allocation from an upstream LIR or the RIPE NCC. > > Verifying actual deployment in an end-user-accessible form would > be a non-trivial task. True, but we have found ways of gauging utilization of IPv4 addresses without too much effort. Their are some fairly low-touch requirements that could be applied here for IPv6 addresses as well. Such as; entry's in WHOIS, network diagrams/plans, subnetting plans, an announcement in the BGP table, etc. > > Richard > > PS: Personally, I would not mind if no single IPv4 was made any > more without people requesting IPv6, as well. But there's not > enough time left to get that through and the problem will solve > itself, anyway. It's very possible that we are too late to make an appreciable difference to standard allocations, agreed. Hopefully this does solve itself but it may be worth considering such a requirement WRT not only standard allocations but also post-depletion transfers (i.e. a change to section 5.3 would effect transfers under section 5.5). $0.02 ~Chris -- @ChrisGrundemann weblog.chrisgrundemann.com www.burningwiththebush.com www.coisoc.org
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Proposal 2010-2
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Proposal 2010-2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]