[ipv6-wg] internal additional IPv4 assignment policy

Hi all,

Just to make the distinction here, the way I understand the original idea poste by Lubos is to change internal business rules to require customers to have IPv6 deployed before they are being assigned more IPv4 space.

Now maybe this could work and since it is a business rule there is nothing prohibiting you from doing this. There is however a chance you will loose a customer to one of your competitors because they don't have such a rule. But in pricipal this does not change anything in exisiting assignment and allocation policies. Your network your rules and as an LIR you can always decide to not assign addresses.

The suggestion being made by Ahmed however does hint about changing the IPv4 assignment policy to require some form of 'IPv6 readiness' before an end-user can get any new or additional assignments, am I right ? The latter case requires the involvement of the folks from the Address Policy WG, so I please be clear which direction this should go.

Maybe as a first step we can try and work out what the exact requirements for calling somebody 'ipv6 ready' would be.

Grtx,

MarcoH

On 6 mei 2010, at 16:06, Ahmed Abu-Abed wrote:

> This is a good policy and it should help move customers to IPv6 in an orderly manner. We are having a similar discussion on the IPv6 Forum mailing list.
> 
> For validation, other than the Ripeness initiative, there are programs already in place by the IPv6 Forum that validate ISPs and web content owners for v6 readiness.  If customers pass the tests they place the logo on their website and get listed on the Forum's IPv6 Enabled list.
> 
> I suggest RIPE uses this resource (as well as Ripeness) for validating v6 compliance before issuing v4 address blocks. More at http://www.ipv6forum.com/ipv6_enabled/
> 
> Regards,
> Ahmed Abu-Abed
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Lubos Pinkava" <lubos.pinkava at casablanca.cz>
> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 3:48 PM
> To: <ipv6-wg at ripe.net>
> Subject: [Bulk] [ipv6-wg] internal additional IPv4 assignment policy
> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> I've raised an idea concerning additional IPv4 assignments for our customers during RIPE60 beering with quite positive responses, so I would like to share it here and maybe get some additional feedback.
>> 
>> We are a company running ISP/collocation business, promoting IPv6 since 2003 and already having substantial amount of IPv6 enabled customers. In our point of view, it's still pretty slow growth.
>> 
>> What I indend to propose for our operations - active imediately - is this:
>> 
>> - all customers requesting additional /25 (variable) shall have IPv6 assigned and asked for trying it (if not already done before)
>> - all customers requesting additional /24 (variable) must already have active v6 services running (eg. NS/MX/web site for the beginning)
>> 
>> There were several other ISP's interested, each of course with own specifics - but in general, we have agreed, that this can speed up IPv6 adoption especially in collocation / infastructure area and can still go through company processes.
>> 
>> If there are more people interested, we can create some best practice document backing up our work.
>> 
>> 
>> Any thoughts on this subject?
>> 
>> 
>> Lubos Pinkava
>> Casablanca INT s.r.o.
>