On 28 Oct 2020, at 00:38, Peter Koch <pk@ISOC.DE> wrote:
The French report has extensive coverage of IPv6.
While 'net neutrality' is only one angle, it might be instrumental to note what issues get the attention of regulators and what the rationale is.
Thanks for the extensive background information Peter. Just to pick out the mention of the French report, we have been working with ARCEP quite extensively in the past, also in relation to depletion of the IPv4 pool, which became a recurring topic in ARCEP's social media engagement. We have also been involved in the establishment of their IPv6 task force, contributing with information, statistics and experience from similar initiatives. In case it was missed, ARCEP also asked me to contribute to their annual report, with an article that got published in volume 3 "The State of the Internet in France". The article describes the IPv4 market and some statistics as we had them on transfers in France at the time. https://www.arcep.fr/uploads/tx_gspublication/rapport-etat-internet_edition-... <https://www.arcep.fr/uploads/tx_gspublication/rapport-etat-internet_edition-2020_250620.pdf> Also for transparency, BEREC invited us and a number of other stakeholders to participate and present in a session of the Open Internet Group. In this session I provided an overview of the IPv6 adoption in Europe, together with some of the barriers we still observe, like the struggle to create a positive business case and the dependencies that exist in the value-chain. Part of this presentation also addressed the secondary market in IPv4 as the industry's (costly) alternative. Regarding the topic of your email, it is not the first time net neutrality has been flagged in the context of IPv6. And I'm happy to provide some more information and our perspective, based on the conversations we have had with the various NRAs and policymakers, about the need and usefulness of regulatory measures. Talk to you this afternoon, Marco Hogewoning Manager Public Policy and Internet Governance RIPE NCC