On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 1:15 PM Matthew Cowen <[email protected]> wrote: > With this discussion about IPv4 allocations, the waiting list, and > migration to IPv6 (which, as I understand it, is still a priority), has > there been any proposal or discussion about requiring IPv4 > requesters to commit to IPv6 migration? > > I’m not thinking about 4.10, which addresses facilitating migration > to IPv6 for those starting that process. I’m thinking about something > akin to the utilisation rate clause, where allocations depend on > actual/future promised usage. Not a proposal, just a background query.
Hi Matthew, That has come up off and on through the years, particularly when IPv4 was in the runout phase with a shrinking IANA free pool. The general consensus has been that: 1. It's not ARIN's job to pick the technology registrants are required to employ in their networks. 2. It's actually a hard job. What exactly qualifies as "committing to IPv6 migration"? And how would ARIN measure it? There are as many answers as there are people on this mailing list. 3. We as a community don't want ARIN to take on that sort of job. Let ARIN manage the resources registrants -want- to employ and let that be guided bottom-up by the market. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin [email protected] https://bill.herrin.us/ _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
