[ppml] early adopter advantage

[Benjamin Crawford]

I agree with Paul.  I think putting off a policy for
PI space due to concerns on giving certain special
advantages might be a little off based.  If allowing
PI space will help start the drive towards adoption of
IPv6, it make sense to try to make that available.  If
a PI policy is put on the shelf while non-PI
alternatives are developed, I think a lot of people
continue propagating IPv4 and continue to push out the
adoption of v6.

-Ben Crawford

--- Paul Vixie <paul at vix.com> wrote:

> it's been spake several times today that one big
> problem with the IPv6 PI
> proposal was that it would not scale to the full
> IPv6 population, and
> therefore we ought to craft a policy that gave no
> special advantages to
> the early adopters.  MIT and Stanford and DEC and HP
> all having "class A"
> IPv6 networks whereas China can't get one, was cited
> as an example of this.
> 
> another more specific concern i heard today was "if
> we allow PI IPv6 space
> then there will be no incentive to develop non-PI
> multihoming technology".
> 
> i think both of these concerns are misplaced.  if we
> want there to be an
> IPv6 network economy we're going to have to give
> folks what they need to
> become early adopters, and if they're asking for PI
> IPv6, then we have to
> at least listen.  furthermore, the incentive to more
> quickly develop non-PI
> alternatives for IPv6 multihoming might actually be
> higher if there's PI
> space being granted, since it's *such* a bad idea in
> the long run.  (this
> assumes that the primary developers of non-PI IPv6
> multihoming technology
> will be vendors and registries rather than
> end-users; this seems ~likely.)
> _______________________________________________
> PPML mailing list
> PPML at arin.net
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml
> 



		
__________________________________ 
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs