On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Tore Anderson wrote:
* Marco Schmidthttps://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2014-04It's been shown that the current /22 IPv6 requirement causes difficulties in a particular corner case where the applicant has actually already obtained an IPv6 non-PA delegation and are most likely making use of it too (since returning/renumbering is problematic). This is exactly the opposite of the desired effect of fostering IPv6 deployment, indeed, it could be considered as penalising IPv6 deployment. I believe that at this point in time, the community's awareness and use of IPv6 isn't likely to increase further by keeping the /22 IPv6 requirement. In a nutshell: LIRs who have no interest in IPv6 won't start actual deployment even if the /22 IPv6 requirement forces them to obtain an IPv6 allocation, while LIRs who do have an interest in IPv6 will be perfectly able to obtain and deploy IPv6 without the /22 IPv6 requirement present. Given the above, I think it is time to remove it completely. That seems the simplest and cleanest solution. +1 Tore
Very well put. +1 Cheers, Daniel _________________________________________________________________________________ Daniel Stolpe Tel: 08 - 688 11 81 [email protected] Resilans AB Fax: 08 - 55 00 21 63 http://www.resilans.se/ Box 45 094 556741-1193 104 30 Stockholm
