[rpd] IPv6 as a criteria in IPv4 Soft Landing AFPUB-2026-v6-001-DRAFT01.

Thu May 28 15:12:12 UTC 2026

Hi Dorothy,

I need to make this clear again. There is no such thing as migration, we don’t turn-off IPv4 completely. Anyone can keep using it. What we are doing is to ensure with IPv6-only with IPv4-as-a-Service, that both protocols coexist, so we do an ordered transition, at the pace of everyone.

As faster you move to IPv6, as cheaper is your CapEx and OpEx, it is up to each operator.

The RIR job is not setting up policies, is up to the community, the global Internet community.

What we are saying is that the Soft Landing policy already was designed to ensure that newcomers and existing players needing more resources, do it together with IPv6 deployment, but we didn’t set rules to verify that and the level of encouragement was basically cero. Now we, as a community (not the RIR), can decide if we want to give a stronger push and what level of push we want to have.

Fighting against IPv6 deployment is non-sense, it is a very high cost not only for all the players in Africa, but also in the rest of Internet.

We need to see it in the other way around. Deploying IPv6, or extending existing networks with IPv6 is cheaper than buying more and more CGN boxes.

So clearly I must disagree that this will create a burden, on the other way around.

Saying it in a different way: It will be non-sense that an existing operator extend its network to accommodate more customers (that’s the reason they need more IPv4 addresses in the end), and they do it without implementing IPv6, the cost will be bigger with only-IPv4. Same non-sense that a new operator or end-site decides to start just with IPv4, the cost will be bigger.

We need to find the way to word it so there is a proper balance. We are not saying necessarily, because you have “n” new customers and need IPv4 addresses for them, you need to deploy IPv6 in all your network (even less remove IPv4 completely). Let’s find the way to ensure that we request a % of traffic according to the grow that creates you the need for more IPv4 addresses and then ramp-up the following years.

Regards,
Jordi

@jordipalet

> El 28 may 2026, a las 16:40, Dorothy Kwamboka <dkwambs02 at gmail.com> escribió:
> 
> Dear PDWG,
> 
> I understand the concern about low IPv6 adoption, but I have real
> reservations about making it a condition for IPv4 allocations. The
> RIR’s role is to coordinate number resources, not to drive network
> migration. Tying IPv4 access to IPv6 deployment turns a resource
> policy into a migration mandate, adding cost and complexity for
> operators, particularly in emerging markets where IPv4 is still
> essential.
> 
> The Soft Landing policy already limits supply. Adding a mandatory IPv6
> requirement would shift the burden to ordinary operators, while the
> benefits flow mainly to registry structures and large vendors. I ask
> the PDWG to consider these consequences carefully.
> 
> Regards,
> Dorothy.
> 
> On Thu, May 28, 2026 at 4:58 PM jordi.palet--- via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Fully agree. I think my recent response to Theresa provides a bigger context/response.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Jordi
>> 
>> @jordipalet
>> 
>> 
>> El 28 may 2026, a las 13:44, Jaco Kroon <jaco at uls.co.za> escribió:
>> 
>> Hi Seun,
>> 
>> I don't think anybody at this point in time should become an Afrinic member if they don't deal with reality:  You need to deploy IPv6.
>> 
>> I do agree it shouldn't run stale - but I'd rather see that happening than people don't actively deploy IPv6.
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> Jaco
>> 
>> On 2026/05/28 13:40, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
>> 
>> This proposal looks good to me in principle but I'd like to mention that if this is a first v4 request then perhaps V6 deployment plan requirement should not be mandatory.
>> 
>> While we need people to deploy V6, we also don't want V4 to run stale in AFRINIC's vault, a balanced depletion rate may be good. I fear this proposal may reduce depletion rate of v4 which I know may not be the intent.
>> 
>> I also look forward to reading staff analysis of this proposal especially as it concerns V6 justification implementation
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> ----
>> Sent from my mobile
>> kindly excuse typos
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, 28 May 2026, 3:05 am Darwin Da Costa, <dacostadarwin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear PDWG,
>>> 
>>> We have received a new draft policy proposal - IPv6 as a criteria in IPv4 Soft Landing ID AFPUB-2026-v6-001-DRAFT01 from author Jordi Palet Martinez. The proposal contents are published at:
>>> 
>>> https://afrinic.net/afpub-2026-v6-001-draft01
>>> 
>>> 
>>> We encourage you to take some time to go through the proposal contents and  provide feedback as follows:
>>> 
>>> a)Do you support or oppose the proposal?
>>> 
>>> b) If you oppose the proposal, state your reasons?
>>> 
>>> c) Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
>>> 
>>> d) What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more effective?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Vincent Ngundi & Darwin Da Costa
>>> AFRINIC PDWG Co-Chairs
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RPD mailing list
>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> **********************************************
>> IPv4 is over
>> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
>> http://www.theipv6company.com
>> The IPv6 Company
>> 
>> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.