IPv6 as a criteria in IPv4 Soft Landing

Details

Name of Proposal	IPv6 as a criteria in IPv4 Soft Landing	Status:	Under Discussion
ID:	AFPUB-2026-v6-001-DRAFT03	Date Submitted:	17/09/2026
Author(s):	Jordi Palet Martinez jordi.palet[at]theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company Jaco Kroon jaco[at]uls.co.za Ultimate Linux Solutions	Version:	3.0
Obsoletes:		Amends:	CPM

1. Summary of the problem being addressed by this proposal

Current deployment of IPv6 in AFRINIC service region is very low compared with other parts of the world, despite the continuous efforts undertaken by AFRINIC.

Data from APNIC Labs:

Average IPv6 World capability 44% (including Africa)
- 37%-51% depending on the region, about 50 countries exceed 50%)
Africa IPv6 World capability 6%
- Only 8 countries exceed 20%, 15 countries 10-19%, 15 countries below 1%

At the same time, AFRINIC is under the Soft Landing policy, Phase 2 since 2020 and since then, 3 million IPv4 addresses have been recovered.

The Soft Landing policy restricts the requests of IPv4 addresses, and despite that, it has not clearly proven an increase of the IPv6 deployment, so it looks like further measures need to be enforced towards giving a strong push on that direction, aligned with the Soft Landing policy.

Community discussions often come back to the same question: Should we mandate IPv6 deployment for new IPv4 requests? It seems there is no plausible reason for not doing so.

2. Summary of how this proposal addresses the problem

This proposal adds a paragraph to the existing Soft Landing policy in order to enforce IPv6 deployment for those requesting new IPv4 resources, regardless of being an initial or subsequent request.

Proposal

3. Proposal

Amend article 5.4.4 of the CPM, as follows:

Current	Proposed
5.4.4 For any LIR or End User requesting IPv4 address space during the Exhaustion There is no explicit limit on the number of times an organization may request additional IPv4 address space during the Exhaustion Period.	5.4.4 For any LIR or End User requesting IPv4 address space during the Exhaustion There is no explicit limit on the number of times an organization may request additional IPv4 address space during the Exhaustion Period. Any IPv4 request must be done with a simultaneous IPv6 request if the requesting party does not already have IPv6 space. Regardless of if the IPv6 request was already done previously or simultaneously with the IPv4 request, the relevant allocation/assignment criteria conditions must be met. In addition to the compliance with section 6.5, a credible IPv6 deployment and addressing plan, must be presented clearly showing specifically how will be met: 6.5.1.1.3 and 6.5.1.1.4, in the case of LIRs. 6.8.2.2.d, in the case of End-Users (EUs). When applying for additional IPv4 space, the following conditions must be met as per the time frames from issuance of the first IPv6 space to LIRs and EUs, or {policy implementation date}, whichever is later. In the case of access networks, the percentage of customers that have access to global IPv6 delegations “without interference required from the Network Operator” must be at or above the following thresholds: 25 % within 12 months; 50% within 24 months; 75% within 36 months; 95% within 48 months. In the case of content hosting networks, the percentage of assigned IPv4 space assigned to those networks “also covered by IPv6 assignments” must reach: 25 % within 12 months; 50% within 24 months; 75% within 36 months; 95% within 48 months. In the case where a network provides both access and content hosting services, both criteria must be independently complied with. AFRINIC will establish as much as possible automated testing to verify the compliance, which will be complemented with existing public tools and measurements. Failure to comply with the IPv6 deployment plan according to the relevant criteria, once verified by AFRINIC, constitutes a policy violation. Notes, for the avoidance of doubt: “without interference required from the Network Operator" means that all the devices of the access network must permit a fully working IPv6 configuration, and the assigned space must be reachable from the global routing table. “also covered by IPv6 assignments” means that it must be reachable from the global routing table.

5. References

In other regions, all IPv4 addresses have been exhausted and it seems that the equivalent to the soft-landing is not any more an issue, because most of the existing members only can access IPv4 addresses via transfers. Some of them have waiting lists,

ARIN has a dedicated IPv4 pool (NRPM 4.10.) to facilitate IPv6 deployment, which only can be used for specific IPv6 deployment needs.

In LACNIC, a request for IPv4 must be accompanied by an IPv6 request (if it was not already done for that member). This was already part of the IPv4 policy even before the equivalent to the “Soft Landing” policy.

There are some other exceptions, like for example the mandatory deployment of IPv6 in IXPs.

Revision History

4. Revision History

Date	Details
22/05/2026	Version 1: AFPUB-2026-v6-001-DRAFT01 Initial Draft Posted to RPD
14/06/2026	Version 2: AFPUB-2026-v6-001-DRAFT02 Updated following RPD discussion
17/09/2026	Version 3: AFPUB-2026-v6-001-DRAFT03 Updated following RPD discussion and IA. Changed the criteria.