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

[Fundiswa Nadia Maseko]

Dear colleagues,

I would like to share another perspective on the proposal.

>From my understanding, the primary role of the Regional Internet Registries
has always been to coordinate Internet number resources through
transparent, community-developed policies.

Making IPv6 deployment a requirement for IPv4 Soft Landing appears to
extend that role into evaluating how network operators design and manage
their networks.

This raises an important governance question: how would it be determined
whether an operator has deployed "enough" IPv6? Would this be based on
traffic percentages, addressing plans, or some other measure? Different
operators also have different deployment models, which could make such
assessments difficult and open to interpretation.

In my view, Soft Landing policies should remain focused on the fair
management of IPv4 resources rather than using IPv4 allocation to influence
network architecture decisions.

I fully support continued IPv6 adoption through technical assistance,
training, operational collaboration, and knowledge sharing. However, making
IPv6 deployment a compliance requirement for IPv4 policy may
unintentionally expand the role of the registry beyond neutral resource
coordination.

As the Internet continues to evolve, I believe it is important to maintain
a clear distinction between coordinating Internet number resources and
influencing operational decisions.

Kind regards,

Fundiswa Nadia Maseko

"Governance should follow operational reality."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260707/40ad19d8/attachment.html>