[arin-ppml] IPv6 migration and NRPM clarification question

[Matthew Cowen]

HI all,

I’m often told that there are no stupid questions… to that, I say, hold my beer :)

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.

I searched the archives and haven’t found anything quite as specific as that, hence my question.

One other observation. In the NRPM, it is written:

- 4.2.1.3. Utilization Rate
- 4.2.3.4.1. Utilization
- 4.2.4.1. Utilization Percentage (80%)
- 4.3.3. Utilization Rate
- 4.3.6.1. Utilization Requirements for Additional Assignment

4.2.1.3. is a *statement* and all the others are *requirements*.

Should these be clarified as Utilisation Rate for the statement and Utilization Percentage (X %) for the requirement, or similar, i.e.,

- 4.2.1.3. Utilization Rate
- 4.2.3.4.1. Utilization Percentage (80%)
- 4.2.4.1. Utilization Percentage (80%)
- 4.3.3. Utilization Percentage (50%)
- 4.3.6.1. Utilization Percentage (80%) Requirements for Additional Assignment ?

Many thanks.

—
My best/Cordialement,

Matthew Cowen
dgtlfutures
+596 (0) 696 210 260
Matthew Cowen | LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewcowen/>

I write a little<https://matthewcowen.org/categories/newsletter/> about the digital world. No pressure, only if you’re interested.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20240814/cc630461/attachment-0001.htm>