IPv4 Soft Landing – bis (Alain Aina)

Identidade verificada: 11 de set. de 2026

Mensagens de discussão

2

Primeira atividade

3 de fev. de 2016

Última atividade

25 de ago. de 2016

Primeira posição explícita

Oposição

Última posição explícita

Oposição

Mudanças de posição

0

Coerência do ponto de vista

Nenhuma avaliação de coerência validada

Outras políticas

16

Primeira posição explícita: Oposição → Última posição explícita: Oposição · Mudanças de posição: 0

1. 3 de fev. de 2016 · Processual ou neutro

   [rpd] Some thoughts, and some actions required

   Unless I misunderstand the AfriNIC RPD process, if we do not come to consensus on a policy in June, there cannot be a policy until at least 6 months later when the next AfriNIC meeting occurs. … As Andrew has shown that runout will very likely occur in the time between those two meetings, I think that depending on existing stockpiles of addresses to get everyone through the time to develop a policy at the following meeting is rather short-sighted and perilous. … If the community as a whole decides that running out with a resounding thud and taking an approach of too-bad-so-sad, all expansion must now be IPv6, then I don?t really have a problem with that decision. I think it will be a difficult decision for many to live with, but who knows, perhaps it will give IPv6 a nice kick into high gear and everything will turn out OK after all. … What I would hate to see is for the community to stick their collective head in the sand and refuse to consider the consequences of such a decision allowing it to occur passively and without forethought and deliberation. … The soft landing policy isn?t a workaround as it stands. I?m not sure that minor modification will turn it into one. However, if you care to expand on what minor changes you believe will provide such a remedy, I think the community would give them the appropriate consideration.

   Fatos com fonte ↗
2. 25 de ago. de 2016 · Oposição

   [rpd] Policy Proposal Update - IPv4 Soft Landing-bis

   Shortchanging more people in order to keep IPv4 space in the free pool longer is not helping anyone. … If there is a justified need for the resources, then the RIR should distribute them accordingly. When there are no more resources to distribute, the RIR should record appropriate transfers as the community sees fit to permit in policy. … Beyond that, the RIR has very little (no?) role in artificially extending the life of IPv4 by creating more shortages for more people while a free pool continues to exist.

   Fatos com fonte ↗

Mensagens de política: 177