Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Inter-RIR Resource
lee.howard at retevia.net
Mon Dec 3 18:11:14 UTC 2018
On 12/3/18 3:41 AM, Ish Sookun wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> On 12/2/18 6:50 PM, Andrew Alston wrote:
>> I would oppose any such clause – because there is absolutely zero
>> indication that a clause like this has any effect anywhere in the world.
> Most discussions on this list regarding IPv4 resources portray the
> - IPv4 is scarce
> - Transition to IPv6 should be encouraged
> Almost in every other discussion people don't stop reminding that IPv4
> is finite. Yet the IPv6 transition is mostly "talks" with little action.
> This might keep going unless the criteria for requesting IPv4 resources
> for growing networks includes a plan for IPv6.
> This topic would not be suitable to discuss in the Inter-RIR thread but
> it bounced back as IPv6 transition was reminded again by Jordi:
> On 11/27/18 9:31 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:
>> Also agree. There is an urgent need for a transition plan, and that
> includes carefully considering an IPv6 addressing plan, among other things.
>> Fact is – it is not the job of an RIR to tell people how to run their
>> networks – it is the RIR’s job to evaluate if someone has a need for v4
>> addresses and supply them if they do. You cannot force people to
>> transition to IPv6 – and if a network chooses not to do so for whatever
>> reason – that is their choice, and in the end they will be penalized for
> By setting a criteria to qualify for more IPv4 addresses from a
> depleting pool does not appear like telling operators how to run their
> networks. To me it sounds like: "Hey, we're running out of IPv4 and
> we're not giving any now but if you need it for your IPv6 transition we
> can allocate you some."
This could be expressed as, "Tell us your plans for addressing after
Afrinic runs out of IPv4 addresses."
That plan could include one or more of:
1. Buying addresses, with a budget, and maybe an analysis that there are
enough addresses to be bought at the budgeted price. Afrinic might be
able to aggregate these responses and inform the community what the
expected demand will be, which will help inform the discussion of
2. Carrier-grade NAT. Afrinic might respond with pointers to papers on
why that's not a great option.
3. Plan for IPv6 deployment with transition mechanism.
4. Statement that no additional IPv4 addresses will be needed after
runout. That might trigger a review, if a process for one is in place.
This way, Afrinic makes sure organizations are planning for runout,
without telling them what the answer must be.
> Ish Sookun
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
More information about the RPD