Hi Graham,
I won't respond to the first part of your message for now.
At 01:07 14-05-2009, Graham Beneke wrote:
I think that this puts the focus on the wrong aspects. We are trying to
drive IPv6 adoption are we not? It should not be an afterthought once
the IPv4 space has been allocated.
Let's not mix evangelisation and operational matters. It's up to the
members to determine whether they want to use this proposal to drive
IPv6 adoption. It's not up to me to determine the financial impact. :-)
I would suggest rather - that all IPv4 space requests during the
exhaustion phase will only be accepted once the LIR has been allocated
(or has had an allocation approved) of IPv6 space under the current IPv6
allocation policy.
There is already plenty of IPv6 space that has been allocated but never
used. I think that LIRs MUST have IPv6 space and have a concrete
deployment plan before they can be considered for IPv4 space during the
exhaustion phase.
That's one of the questions item (b) may have to address.
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
