<div dir="auto"><div>
<p>I support this proposal and consider it is very welcome
and came at a right time.<br>
<br>
It makes total sense to require networks at minimal to show IPv6
is operational in order to transfer more IPv4. It shows a
commitment with all others, otherwise the opposite is really bad
for whole Internet community interests.</p><p><br></p><p>This proposal *does NOT* mandate anyone to deploy IPv6 in their networks. Only adds a new requirement for those who *optionally choose* to transfer IPv4 space.<br>
<br>
We have been seen growing and concerning issues related to IPv4
exhaustion and we are only at the beginning. Some people say we
still have 10 to 20 years ahead of this situation which will cause
serious issues, not only to those who require more IPv4 to operate
but also to those who need to communicate with them. I also
consider the unnecessary prorogation of the current scenario is
bad for the society as whole by, for example, difficulting or make
unfeasible crime investigation in certain situations.<br>
Furthermore the remainder of this current scenario makes the
things a lot more difficult for all RIRs to work and specially to
these policy lists by the possibility of the increasing conflicts
due to different points of view on how to deal with this growing issue.<br>
</p>
<p>I don't think there is any unfairness to request such a thing the
proposal suggests. The right to transfer more and more IPv4 is
secured as long the organization show commitment to the natural
evolution of the Internet. And more important, the right to not deploy IPv6 is also secured.</p><p><br>
Unfairness in reality is to all others when some organizations
keep refusing to to adequate to something that is not just
optional or cosmetic but mandatory to survival and good health of
the this well established system.</p>
<p>Well pointed the ARIN's Board resolution regarding the topic in
requesting AC to consider changes to encourage migration to IPv6.<br>
</p>
<p>Best regards</p><p>Fernando Frediani</p>
<div>On 06/11/2019 14:55, ARIN wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">On 1
November 2019, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted
"ARIN-prop-278: Require IPv6 Before Receiving Section 8 IPv4
Transfers" as a Draft Policy.
<br>
<br>
Draft Policy ARIN-2019-19 is below and can be found at:
<br>
<br>
<a href="https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_19/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_19/</a>
<br>
<br>
You are encouraged to discuss all Draft Policies on PPML. The AC
will evaluate the discussion in order to assess the conformance of
this draft policy with ARIN's Principles of Internet number
resource policy as stated in the Policy Development Process (PDP).
Specifically, these principles are:
<br>
<br>
* Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration
<br>
* Technically Sound
<br>
* Supported by the Community
<br>
<br>
The PDP can be found at:
<br>
<a href="https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/</a>
<br>
<br>
Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
<br>
<a href="https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/</a>
<br>
<br>
Regards,
<br>
<br>
Sean Hopkins
<br>
Policy Analyst
<br>
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Draft Policy ARIN-2019-19: Require IPv6 Before Receiving Section 8
IPv4 Transfers
<br>
<br>
Problem Statement:
<br>
<br>
On 7 May 2007 the ARIN Board unanimously passed an IPv6
resolution. In 2011, the last /8 blocks were assigned to the RIR’s
and has now been over 4 years since the IPv4 free pool was
exhausted at ARIN.
<br>
<br>
Now is the time for ARIN to require those who receive transferred
IPv4 space to have in place an operational IPv6 network.
<br>
<br>
Policy statement:
<br>
<br>
In section 8.5.2, add the following language to the end of the
paragraph entitled “Operational Use”:
<br>
<br>
Such operational network must at minimum include an allocation or
assignment by ARIN of IPv6 address space under the same Org ID
receiving the transferred IPv4 space. Such Org must be able to
prove this IPv6 space is being routed by using it to communicate
with ARIN.
<br>
<br>
In the event the receiver provides a written statement from its
upstream that IPv6 connectivity is unavailable, the IPv6
requirement may be waived.
<br>
<br>
Timetable for Implementation: Upon Passage
<br>
<br>
Anything Else:
<br>
<br>
The following was included in the IPv6 resolution:
<br>
<br>
BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board of Trustees hereby requests the
ARIN Advisory Council to consider Internet Numbering Resource
Policy changes advisable to encourage migration to IPv6 numbering
resources where possible.
<br>
<br>
This proposal is part of an effort to encourage migration to IPv6.
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
ARIN-PPML
<br>
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
<br>
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).
<br>
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
<br>
<a href="https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a>
<br>
Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.
<br>
</blockquote>
</div></div>