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

[rpd] IPv4 Soft Landing BIS

Andrew Alston Andrew.Alston at
Mon Aug 7 10:03:16 UTC 2017


I don’t have an issue with this – I was also thinking, perhaps we need a policy that says that any policy must have at least one author on it that can clearly demonstrate their own v6 deployments, to customers, not just in the core and not just an announcement?


From: Mark Elkins [mailto:mje at]
Sent: 07 August 2017 12:47
To: rpd at
Subject: Re: [rpd] IPv4 Soft Landing BIS

I believe this is largely influenced by how Telkom SA works. Getting
IPv6 connectivity from them is not easy (I believe it should be
automatic). They certainly do not provide IPv6 over the aDSL - thus
other people copy them. Disappointing.

If I could make a simple change to Policy, when a (prospective) LIR
talks to AfriNIC to obtain numbering resources:

1) If one has no AfriNIC resources - one can ask for them by any
connectivity method (IPv4/IPv6). A first request for IPv4 should
probably also include a request for IPv6. Perhaps one would have to
provide justification in order to not also get IPv6?
2) If the LIR has IPv4 resources but no IPv6 resources - the LIR can
only ask AfriNIC for IPv6 resources (presumably via IPv4).
3) If the LIR has IPv6 address space - then all requests to AfriNIC must
be made from the LIR's own IPv6 address space.

i.e. Policy that encourages LIR's to use IPv6.

On 07/08/2017 11:23, Andrew Alston wrote:
> Basically, Saul is correct.
> Again, most FTTH providers are using a form of "naked" FTTH, as in, they don't control the OLT's and the backend infrastructure. The IPOE/PPPOE side of things is controlled by a relatively small number of players and they need to v6 enable.
> In our case - we are fortunate enough to control not only the fiber, but the OLT's, ONT's and BRAS equipment - basically - we own the infrastructure end to end - making v6 turn up relatively simple.
> Yes, they can proxy off the radius authentication to other providers to enable an IPC style environment - but until they actually support V6 across that - things are going to be a problem. Right now - we need a way to find a way to convince certain companies (who I am resisting naming here) to v6 enable so that v6 can actually happen.
> And here is the thing - denying IP space to anyone - isn't going to help, because it's not the providers getting the v4 address space or being denied the v4 address space that are in the driving seat here - it’s the big providers. And I know, someone is going to turn around and say, well, use another provider. Guess what - right now - *NONE* of the providers who have this infrastructure are doing it - so the option isn't really there (yet).
> Andrew
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Saul Stein [mailto:saul at]
> Sent: 07 August 2017 12:05
> To: Andre van Zyl <vanzyla at<mailto:vanzyla at>>; Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at<mailto:Andrew.Alston at>>
> Cc: rpd >> AfriNIC Resource Policy <rpd at<mailto:rpd at>>
> Subject: RE: [rpd] IPv4 Soft Landing BIS
> Hi Andre,
>> They are indeed an ADSL provider, and what you say around DSL in SA is
>> correct. However, they are also a hosting, and an rapidly expanding
>> FTTH operation, and by >your own feedback FTTH is an area where IPv6
>> can be and is successfully deployed.
> Sadly this is not true... while there are one or two FTTH companies that can, the big national guys that own the fibre in the ground don’t support it, so the ISPs can't supply it. :-(
> Saul
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at<mailto:RPD at>

Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa
mje at<mailto:mje at> Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA:<>

RPD mailing list
RPD at<mailto:RPD at><>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list