Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[AfriNIC-rpd] Pushing IPv6

Sunday Folayan sfolayan at
Thu Nov 24 18:54:10 UTC 2011



On 11/24/2011 06:44 PM, McTim wrote:
> I think that douglas is correct. I also think that an rir should not 
> be in a position to dictate what protocols should be used by 
> operators. Regards, McTim
> On Nov 24, 2011 8:12 PM, "Douglas Onyango" <ondouglas at 
> <mailto:ondouglas at>> wrote:
>     Mark,
>     If i get you right, then this policy would be:-
>     1. Requiring Members applying for v4 to apply for and be
>     allocated/assigned v6 blocks as well
>     2. Requiring members to (somehow) demonstrate usage of their v6
>     blocks.
>     Borrowing from my experience authoring the IPv4 Softlanding Policy,
>     where similar ideas were advanced, i would say this would be
>     "dictating to Members how to run their networks..." - To use the exact
>     words used at the time.
>     Now, unless the community's take on this has changed, I remember these
>     points bringing alot of contention to the said Policy with the only
>     option being for us to remove the whole tying v4
>     allocation/assignment/usage to v6 (or the reverse) out of the Policy.
>     So going  by the Community's feel at the time (which i doubt has
>     changed much), i wouldn't say this makes sense....But maybe i am wrong
>     on the community's perspective.
>     Regards,
>     --
>     Douglas Onyango | +256(0712)981329 <tel:%2B256%280712%29981329> |
>     Twitter: @ondouglas
>     Life is the educator's practical joke in which you spend the first
>     half learning, and the second half learning that everything you
>     learned in the first was a joke.
>     _______________________________________________
>     rpd mailing list
>     rpd at <mailto:rpd at>
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list