[address-policy-wg] Comments on proposal 2014-04 (Remove the IPv6 Requirement for receiving address space)

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:09:50AM +0000, Daniel Davis wrote:
> Our comment on thIs proposal is:
> We would not support this proposal to Remove the IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8.
> This is because his policy encourages ripe members to start the process of using ipv6 addresses, and that given the shortage of ipv4 space migration is becoming increasingly important.
> By changing this policy we believe this will give out the wrong signals to the industry about ipv6 migration.

This argument has been brought up before, and I consider it addressed
(by asking the RIPE NCC to send very clear signals regarding IPv6 
encouragements to future applicants, and also increasing their general
IPv6 outreach).

Last Call is there to bring up arguments opposing the proposal that have
not been voiced and answered before - like, some completely new angle
hat has been overlooked.

As always, consensus does not have to be unanimous if there is sufficiently
strong support.

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20150122/b81d909c/attachment.sig>