<div dir="auto">The point that a quick exhaustion or depletion of IPv4 is our hope and desire, so that network operators or managers, can quickly adopt IPv6. <div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Rather what we see is a bunch of people proposing and pushing for propsals such as the Review Policy so that IPv4 can be kept in a granary and fetch when it is 'needed'. This is a retrogressive mentality, which shouldn't be encouraged by a last call.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The quick termination of this inhibiting policy proposal, is critical and ugent. The authors should take up drafting other policy proposals as we saw several of these needs at Hammanet. Let them abandon this unproductive pursued of ressurecting a dead horse.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Cheers </div><div dir="auto">Daniel</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Sun, Dec 2, 2018, 3:54 PM Andrew Alston <<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="m_-6918039654801401165WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">I would oppose any such clause – because there is absolutely zero indication that a clause like this has any effect anywhere in the world.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">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 it.
<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">For years people looked for the proverbial silver bullet that will move people towards IPv6 – and never found it – that is because IPv6 is yet another part of the Internet – it is not something that can be commercialized – it is not something
to be sold – it is there because such like BGP, IS-IS, OSPF, IPv4, whatever else – we need it – it forms an underlying part of the infrastructure.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The only real driver towards IPv6 will be the depletion of and/or scarcity and expense associated with IPv4 – it will not be through coercive policies that are outside of the mandate of an RIR<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Andrew<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From: </span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Ish Sookun <<a href="mailto:ish.sookun@lasentinelle.mu" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">ish.sookun@lasentinelle.mu</a>><br>
<b>Organization: </b>La Sentinelle Ltd<br>
<b>Date: </b>Sunday, 2 December 2018 at 17:05<br>
<b>To: </b>JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <<a href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a>>, "<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rpd@afrinic.net</a>" <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rpd@afrinic.net</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [rpd] Inter-RIR Resource<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi Jordi,<br>
<br>
On 11/27/18 9:31 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:<br>
> Also agree. There is an urgent need for a transition plan, and that includes carefully considering an IPv6 addressing plan, among other things. No need to stockpile IPv6, BUT you need to have some to make the transition, even if you plan for an IPv6-only
network.<br>
<br>
Could this be addressed in a policy such as Soft-Landing, like making<br>
having an IPv6 transition plan as one of the qualifying criteria for<br>
more IPv4 resources?<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Ish Sookun<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
<br>
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
</blockquote></div>