[address-policy-wg] 2015-05

On 10/21/2015 4:05 PM, Netskin NOC wrote:
> Am 21.10.2015 um 14:40 schrieb Ciprian Nica:
>>
>> I would support something like this but with a few changes. I would set
>> some milestones, let's say by the end of 2016 you need to have 5% IPv6
>> adoption rate or you have to return 5% from the IPs that were allocated
>> to you before the end of 2006 (so it would be a 10 year frame). Then at
>> the end of 2017 they would need to have 10% IPv6 adoption rate or return
>> 10% of the IPs allocated before the end of 2007 and so on.
>>
> 
> What about a new policy proposal for that? Please let me know if you'd like to work on one together.

If there is support for the idea, then we can come up with a proposal
after making a thorough analysis and think of some efficient
percentages, terms, etc.

>> Something like this would push the "old" ISPs to make the first steps
>> towards IPv6 and would not affect the relatively new entrants whom would
>> not make sense returning 50-100 IPs from their /22.
>>
> 
> The last /22 (or even /21, which everybody can get then easily) shouldn't be affected.

The idea is to promote IPv6 adoption but if we (the community) would get
back enough resources then we can come up with policies to increase the
"minimum guaranteed IPv4 slice" that gets out to everyone.

>> I would support this, although I know it would be very difficult to ask
>> Telefonica to return Orange or Deutsche Telekom return millions of IPs.
>> RIPE NCC is not the police but we can all think of a way to implement
>> this, if the community would support it.
>>
> 
> I'm no lawyer, but from a technical point of view it shouldn't be a problem for RIPE to disconnect them. Any I'm quite
> sure they'll act before that happens.

RIPE NCC can only do what RIPE decides but obviously it has to be legal
so we'll have to consult on all aspects.

Ciprian