[AfriNIC-rpd] Pushing IPv6

[Vincent Ngundi]

I agree with Owen, let's not give out v6 just for the sake of it.

There's a constituency that I think requires urgent attention, government.
With many governments rolling out e-government services, my thoughts are
that AfriNIC should come up with programs that target governments, one of
the biggest (potential) user of IP resources. This program should _mainly
target policy makers.

Regards,

Vincent Ngundi
Twitter: @VincentNgundi

On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 11:19 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

>
> On Nov 24, 2011, at 8:37 AM, Mark Elkins wrote:
>
> > After listening at AfriNIC-15 and what happens in LACNIC - would it make
> > sense to propose a policy that...
> >
> > Purpose - to promote IPv6
> >
> > In order for a resource member to get any new IPv4 resource - and they
> > have no IPv6 resource - they must apply for an IPv6 resource as well.
> >
> Personally I don't think so. All it does is push people to request
> resources
> which they can then leave on the shelf. We want to drive actual IPv6
> deployment, not merely address consumption.
>
> In fact, I would say that driving address consumption without deployment
> is a net lose for the community.
>
> > If the resource member asks for any new IPv4 resource - and they have
> > any IPv6 resources older than four months of age - then the resource
> > member must show that any of their existing IPv6 resources are in use
> > either visible in the Routing Tables or the IPv6 resource must be
> > provably in use (reachable via another Member), which would exclude
> > anything in a testing environment.
> >
>
> This takes a step towards pushing deployment, but, in fact, it's pretty
> easy to anchor a route at one of your edges and not actually deploy
> anything behind it.
>
> I think it's better to work on more meaningful deployment through outreach
> and encouragement rather than through policy. Policy initiatives tend to
> drive resistance and people tend to do the bare minimum necessary to
> work through or around the policy rather than look for ways to go beyond
> what the policy requires.
>
> Better would be to provide hall-of-fame style incentives for people to
> go as far as they can in IPv6 deployment. Something like the RIPEness
> program at RIPE NCC.
>
> Owen
>
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20111125/f046ac5f/attachment.html>