[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 123: Reserved Pool for Critical Infrastructure - revised

[Leo Bicknell]

In a message written on Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 11:53:35AM -0800, Scott Leibrand wrote:
> Is this policy is only really needed if we pass 122? As I read it, CI needs can be met under 4.10. 

I re-read 4.10 trying to be as liberal as possible with respect to
Critical Infrastructure needs, but I believe CI will likely fail
points 1 and 5, and 3 could be an issue depending on how it was
interpreted.

I'm fairly sure CI wasn't intended to be in 4.10, to quote " a
contiguous /10 IPv4 block will be set aside and dedicated to
facilitate IPv6 deployment."  I have a hard time arguing CI IPv4
is necessary to facilitate IPv6 deployment, CI IPv4 is needed because
it is /critical/ to operating the IPv4 network.

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 826 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20101121/0f24016c/attachment.sig>