Person profile
PersonPublic policy participant
The available evidence covers Roles: presenter (ANTEL).
Source description Public policy participant
Presentation: Proposal 2007-06 "Global Policy for the Allocation of the Remaining IPv4 Address Space" - Roque Gagliano (ANTEL)
public people profile
Last updated: 2026-09-19
Source facts
Viewpoint consistency: No explicit position stated
Viewpoint consistency: No explicit position stated
Viewpoint consistency: Insufficient evidence to assess consistency
The sole available message questions whether the registry can compel an IPv4-only user to upgrade to dual stack and suggests that compulsion would instead belong to a regulator; it does not establish a settled judgment on the entire proposal.
Settling IPv4-IPv6 connectivity disputes when only one of the protocols is supported
Assessment: Insufficient evidence to assess consistency · The sole available message questions whether the registry can compel an IPv4-only user to upgrade to dual stack and suggests that compulsion would instead belong to a regulator; it does not establish a settled judgment on the entire proposal.
Obligar? LACNIC s?lo es responsible de asignar las direcciones IPs? el ?nico podr?a obligar es un regulador pero no creo que queramos ir por ese camino.
Settling IPv4-IPv6 connectivity disputes when only one of the protocols is supported · IP-Based Geolocation
Assessment: Insufficient evidence to assess consistency · One message questions institutional authority to compel a network change and the other questions implementation and privacy implications of geolocation. Each is supported by one substantive message, so they do not establish a comparable cross-policy position.
Obligar? LACNIC s?lo es responsible de asignar las direcciones IPs? el ?nico podr?a obligar es un regulador pero no creo que queramos ir por ese camino.
Me parece que a la propuesta le falta un poco de informaci?n en el "c?mo?" pues esa informaci?n es muy din?mica y te acercas a temas de privacidad de los individuos.
Viewpoint consistency: Insufficient evidence to assess consistency
The sole available message asks for more detail about how the geolocation proposal would operate, noting dynamic information and possible individual privacy concerns; technical references do not amount to final support or opposition.
Assessment: Insufficient evidence to assess consistency · The sole available message asks for more detail about how the geolocation proposal would operate, noting dynamic information and possible individual privacy concerns; technical references do not amount to final support or opposition.
Me parece que a la propuesta le falta un poco de informaci?n en el "c?mo?" pues esa informaci?n es muy din?mica y te acercas a temas de privacidad de los individuos.
Ando medio desactualizado, pero recuerdo algunas propuestas en el grupo GEOPRIV que ataca este tema:
Settling IPv4-IPv6 connectivity disputes when only one of the protocols is supported · IP-Based Geolocation
Assessment: Insufficient evidence to assess consistency · One message questions institutional authority to compel a network change and the other questions implementation and privacy implications of geolocation. Each is supported by one substantive message, so they do not establish a comparable cross-policy position.
Obligar? LACNIC s?lo es responsible de asignar las direcciones IPs? el ?nico podr?a obligar es un regulador pero no creo que queramos ir por ese camino.
Me parece que a la propuesta le falta un poco de informaci?n en el "c?mo?" pues esa informaci?n es muy din?mica y te acercas a temas de privacidad de los individuos.
