[address-policy-wg] 2014-04 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Removing IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8)

On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Tore Anderson wrote:

> * Marco Schmidt
>
>>     https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2014-04
>
> It'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                   stolpe at resilans.se
Resilans AB             Fax:  08 - 55 00 21 63            http://www.resilans.se/
Box 45 094							      556741-1193
104 30 Stockholm