[arin-ppml] IPv6 Non-connected networks

[David Farmer]

Tony Hain wrote:
> I haven't kept up with the PPML list this calendar year, but clearly need to
> get back to it. I have a draft related to FC00::/8
> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-hain-ipv6-ulac-01.txt
> The major diff between the earlier IETF and the Vixie version is the
> specific recognition that making an organization with a public /44 have to
> figure out how to align random /48's under this prefix makes no sense
> operationally. Comments welcome...
> 
> Tony

Tony,

Thanks for the pointer, that one didn't come up when I was googling.

I thought the whole list might be interested.

While this is out of scope of the RFC itself, how would you see
this being implemented?  Would you expect for the RIR's and IANA to
create a global policy and assign ULA-C via the RIR system or are you
envisioning another way?

If we assume the RIRs would be handling ULA-C, then I have a question
about the third paragraph in section 3.2. Global ID. It states;

    The allocation and registration authority should permit allocations
    to be obtained without having any sort of Internet connectivity and
    must include the ability to make an allocation on a permanent basis,
    without any need for renewal.  The registration authority may covers
    its costs through registration fees and may also use registration
    agreements to clearly set forth the terms conditions and liabilities
    associated with registration of such allocations.  The payments and
    conditions associated with this function should not be unreasonably
    onerous to the extent that the availability of allocations is
    impaired.

Do you believe it would be consistent with this paragraph, if ARIN were
to follow business practices for ULA-C similar to those used currently
for an end-user assignments, charging a one-time fee covering its cost
for the assignment activity and then an annual fee for maintaining a
Organizational ID?

I ask because, I believe a fee related to the Organizational ID is an
important mechanism to insure ongoing active business contact between
ARIN and the assignee.  I believe such ongoing active business contact
is essential for maintaining the long-term accuracy of the records
associated with an assignment.

Personally, I don't believe this language is intended to prevent such a 
  model.  However, I could see where some people might interpret this 
language as not allowing that model.

-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota	
2218 University Ave SE	    Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================