[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-16: Ipv4 Soft Landing - asimulation analysis

a) revise 2007-16 to remove the change in allocation criteria but keep  
the requirements for documentation of transition plans (etc.)

------ I (personally) do not believe that it is within the scope of ARIN's mission to create policy that mandates IPv6 as a business practice in order to receive a requested resource (IPv4), when that resource is available.

b) abandon 2007-16 as a bad idea
c) do more simulation studies to see how different the answers might  
be given different assumptions

------ It would be easy for me to support this option given that I do not have the capability to do the work, but would be interested in the underlying assumptions that make a material impact..and their practicality.

------ Bill Darte





What do people think?

Thanks,
-drc
  
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy
Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml
Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20080131/bc00ea42/attachment.html