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

[Asamkele Menzeleli]

Dear Jordi and colleagues,

Thank you for taking the time to explain the operational realities of
large-scale IPv6 deployments. There is no question that practical
deployment experience is extremely valuable, particularly for operators
beginning their IPv6 journey.

However, I wonder whether this discussion risks equating IPv6 deployment
with responsible stewardship of Internet number resources.

Should an operator's eligibility under IPv4 Soft Landing really be judged
by the extent of its IPv6 deployment?

Or should it instead be measured by how responsibly it manages and
justifies its IPv4 resources?

These seem to be fundamentally different objectives.

One concerns network architecture.

The other concerns resource governance.

If the purpose of Soft Landing is to ensure the responsible management of
scarce IPv4 resources, perhaps the policy should remain focused on that
objective alone.

Introducing IPv6 deployment as an assessment criterion inevitably raises
further questions.

Who decides what level of IPv6 deployment is sufficient?

Would different deployment models receive different treatment?

Would operators serving challenging environments be placed at a
disadvantage despite managing their IPv4 resources responsibly?

I also believe this presents an opportunity for a broader governance
discussion.

Rather than introducing additional behavioural criteria, should we instead
be strengthening operator rights through clearer portability provisions,
stronger continuity protections and meaningful exit rights?

Those reforms would benefit every operator, regardless of whether their
network is predominantly IPv4, dual-stack or IPv6.

Jordi, I would be interested in your thoughts on whether governance reforms
of this nature might produce more durable outcomes than linking IPv4 policy
to protocol adoption.

Thank you for the discussion.

Kind regards,
Asamkele Menzeleli
"IPv4 deserves neutral governance"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20260713/a5058efc/attachment-0001.html>