[rpd] IPv6 as a criteria in IPv4 Soft Landing AFPUB-2026-v6-001-DRAFT02

[Nia Petronella]

Dear Haitham,

Thank you for the clarification and for circulating the updated draft
proposal.

I agree that the primary focus of this discussion should remain the policy
proposal itself and whether DRAFT02 adequately addresses the objectives of
the IPv4 Soft Landing policy. At the same time, I believe this does not
preclude broader policy considerations that are directly relevant to
evaluating the proposal.

The proposal explicitly links IPv6 deployment with continued access to IPv4
resources. As a result, perspectives on the economic, operational, and
strategic role of IPv4—including whether IPv4 should be regarded as a
long-term capital asset rather than merely a legacy resource—are not
peripheral to the discussion. They are central to assessing whether the
proposed criteria are proportionate, justified, and aligned with sound
resource governance.

Where community members continue to raise these issues, they are
contributing to the broader policy context that informs the proposal's
merits. Such contributions do not depart from the mandate of the
discussion; rather, they help ensure that policy decisions are evaluated
against both current operational realities and their longer-term governance
implications.

A robust policy development process benefits from examining not only the
wording of a proposal but also the assumptions on which it is based.
Keeping the discussion open to relevant policy perspectives ultimately
strengthens the quality and legitimacy of the consensus-building process.

Kind regards,
Nonhlanhla
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260707/fb1d8bdd/attachment.html>