[ppml] Motivating migration to IPv6

[Scott Leibrand]

Kirk Ismay wrote:
>>  Scalability is the downside.
>>
>>
>>  I am all in favour of giving out exactly one IPv6 block (of PI space)
>>  per ASN, sized appropriately (e.g. sufficient for 10-20 year needs
>>  at least).
>>     
>
> This makes a lot of sense to me.  How about a policy that:
>
> a)  allows any organization to request an IPv6 allocation of a suitably 
> sized block to so long as they have an existing RSA, ASN and IPv4 
> allocation.
>
> b) includes a clause that allows legacy IPv4 holders to be able to also 
> get a block by signing an RSA (carrot approach).
>   

Kirk,

If by "have an existing IPv4 allocation" you mean a direct 
allocation/assignment, I think you just described my "PIv6 for legacy 
holders with RSA and efficient use" policy proposal.  Is that what you 
meant, or were you referring to reallocations and reassignments in 
addition to direct allocations/assignments?

-Scott