[address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Adrian Pitulac
adrian at idsys.ro
Mon Apr 18 18:14:11 CEST 2016
On 18/04/16 18:56, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Mon, 18 Apr 2016, Adrian Pitulac wrote: > >> Having a condition like 3 star IPv6 RIPEness to be able to get >> another IPv4 block each 18 months will provide enough thrust to small >> entities to enable IPv6 in their networks and this way doing >> investments also. They will start providing IPv6 services and this >> way we'll see an objective accomplishment. > > If you change this to: "Provides IPv6 services by default to all > customers who haven't explicitly opted out", I might be tempted to > support this policy proposal. However, I think that would put undue > burden on RIPE to verify the IPv6 deployment of the LIR in question > for them to qualify for another /22 after 18 months. > >> So, I'm convinced that this policy will fuel IPv6 implementation at a >> certain level. > > Checkboxing 3 star IPv6 RIPEness is easy, unfortunately it has very > little to do with real actual widespread IPv6 deployment. > I'm for changing the policy as needed to make this sustainable and also get real benefit (in terms of IPv6 implementation) from it. This is what I proposed from the start in my interventions here.. Let's discuss and see if we can find a way to gain benefit from this policy. I'm sure that the policy proposers, will look carefully and take into consideration any viable idea.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]