[ppml] 2006-2 v6 internal microallocation

> The thing about which I wonder more though is why a codified sunset
> for the allocation, which basically forces a migration upon the
> adopters at such time as ARIN decides that you can stick a fork in the
> technology because it's baked, would make the policy proposal more
> (instead of radically less) palatable?  Am I missing something here?

I think that any kind of sunset or expiry clause is
a bad idea. As long as ARIN maintains contact with
the organizations who receive the addresses, then 
there is the possibility of a future policy change
that involves returning those addresses. 

Today, we are completely ignorant of the situation
in three year's time so we can't show any good reason
for forcing the migration. But, in three years, ARIN
will have the facts at their disposal and all the affected
parties will be able to join in the decision making.
It is better to leave the decision to a later date
and remove any sundown provisions.

--Michael Dillon