Search RPD Archives
[rpd] IPv4 Soft Landing BIS
Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com
Mon Aug 7 12:15:07 UTC 2017
Current process doesn’t require it – nor does it require an entire rewrite of the PDP process to start requiring it – just a simple policy proposal that amends one section.
From: Noah [mailto:noah at neo.co.tz]
Sent: 07 August 2017 14:01
To: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
Cc: Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za>; rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [rpd] IPv4 Soft Landing BIS
On 7 Aug 2017 1:04 p.m., "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com<mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>> wrote:
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?
The current PDP doesn't require such specifics though.
Meanwhile Soflanding-BIS proposal is before a community of experienced folk with a wealthy of IPv4 and IPv6 knowledge and experiences. That is what is needed and most recently I read a comment from one of the Authors Alain Aina seeking suggestions based on the divergent views this wealthy community has share ref: this policy proposal.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD