[AfriNIC-rpd] Pushing IPv6

[Sofía]

Dear Raz,

No, we won't keep allocating IPv6 prefixes.

The policy for initial request says "If the applicant does not already
have an IPv6 block assigned by LACNIC, simultaneously request an IPv6
block in accordance with the corresponding applicable policy."

And the proposal that is in Last Call and applies to additional requests
says "The applicant must already have at least one IPv6 block assigned
by LACNIC or, if not, must simultaneously request an initial IPv6 block
in accordance with the corresponding applicable policy. ..."

So, if the applicant already has an IPv6 allocation/assignment, they
don't have to request another one.

Kind regards,

Ing. Sofía Silva Berenguer
PGP Key ID: 0xAAD4EB5F
Registration Services Area
LACNIC - www.lacnic.net
Latin American and Caribbean Internet Address Registry

El 25/11/11 11:30, rbiramah at ipi9.com escribió:
> Sofia, should we understand that you keep allocating IPv6 prefixes to a member even the previous this member received are not being used? 
> 
> Raz BIRAMAH
> iPi9
> GABON
> 
> Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sofía <sofia at lacnic.net>
> Sender: rpd-bounces at afrinic.net
> Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 08:53:20 
> To: <rpd at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [AfriNIC-rpd] Pushing IPv6
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> I just wanted to clarify that we are not "pushing" anyone and that we
> are not "dictating to Members how to run their networks". The proposals
> I mentioned (LAC-2011-02 and LAC-2011-3.
> http://www.lacnic.net/en/politicas/propuesta-politicas.html) just
> establish that the applicant has to request an IPv6 block in case they
> don't already have one.
> 
> The proposal that applies to additional requests says that if the
> applicant already has an IPv6 block, they have to send us a report
> explaining what they are doing with IPv6, but we won't reject any
> request in case the report says "we are not doing anything". At least
> they will take a few minutes to think about it when writing this report.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Ing. Sofía Silva Berenguer
> PGP Key ID: 0xAAD4EB5F
> Registration Services Area
> LACNIC - www.lacnic.net
> Latin American and Caribbean Internet Address Registry
> 
> El 24/11/11 15:03, Douglas Onyango escribió:
>> 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,
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd