I agree with AlanL, discussions about this policy seem to die as soon
as they start and before we can reach some form of conclusion. I
really think we need to think seriously about this policy as whether
we like it or not, IPv6 is a technology we have to adopt sooner or
later; we better start sorting ourselves out early. It's imperative
that we formulate a policy(ies) that addresses the needs of the
different user groups in the community; thus this policy.
The latest draft can be found at http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/
afpol-v6200701.htm
-v
PS: Abuja is only a month or so away!
On Mar 7, 2007, at 7:02 PM, Alan Levin wrote:
Hi,
Did the list receive this email? Adiel or Ernest please advise?
thanks,
Alan
On 20 Feb 2007, at 12:20 PM, Alan Levin wrote:
Hi all,
This email is to appeal for an interim resolution/allocation of
IPv6 PI space. (I pasted below the first email on this sent over 2
years ago).
Having sat in the policy deliberations on this matter in Maputo,
Cairo and Nairobi, and hearing at each of those meetings how a
Domain Name registry would like to empower its community by
offering IPv6 capability, I am surprised at the current state of
this process and recent events.
Every time that the PI policy on IPv6 has been discussed everyone
had agreed that the allocation should be at least /48. Whilst some
have debated for /32's because of concerns with global routing
tables we've all agreed that a /48 can be delegated asap. Policy
WG chair... this is an urgent appeal for relaxation (ie enable the
consensus that a /48 can be immediately allocated). What seem to
be unnecessary delays in promulgating this policy, are now
seriously hampering our country from embracing IPv6.
Please, even if we don't yet have agreement on this policy, either
you must give the allocation (as has been turned down as the
registry which provides critical infrastructure does not wish - or
need to - become an LIR) or the registry needs to turn to private
individuals to obtain an allocation. Doesn't make sense to me?
Please help!
regards,
Alan
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Ernest Byaruhanga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 March 2004 10:00:42 AM
To: "Alan Barrett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Adiel AKPLOGAN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Alan Levin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: {Spam?} afrinic ipv6 policy
Reply-To: "Ernest Byaruhanga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi Mouhamet & Allan,
IPv4 and ASN policies have been posted on the policy-wg. They
have received a
lot of comments especially from the RIRs (on different lists
though :-) ).
We now need to post the Ipv6 draft, and i suggest we go with the
one in use by
all RIR's for a start, available at
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html
Of course some editing to replace "RIPE NCC" with AfriNIC, etc..
will need to be
done.
If the policies and guidelines in the document look ok for you, i
can go ahead!!
P.S. We still have no chair for the WG :-)
Regards,
---
Ernest M. Byaruhanga,
AfriNIC, Technical Operations.
http://www.afrinic.net
---------------------------------------------
Alan Levin
Tel: +27 21 409-7997
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
---------------------------------------------
Alan Levin
Tel: +27 21 409-7997
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
