[ppml] alternative to 2005-1

On 2/9/06 3:18 PM, "David Conrad" <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Feb 9, 2006, at 12:01 PM, Scott Leibrand wrote:
>>> Note: a /22 is only 2^10 addresses, or 1024. That's a pretty darn
>>> small
>>> site, if you ask me.
>> So what?  We give them a routing slot for IPv4.  Why shouldn't they
>> get
>> one in IPv6?
> 
> One of the arguments back in IPng days was that one of the benefits
> of IPng would be we'd be able to start with a clean slate in terms of
> routing and all the historical mistakes made with IPv4 wouldn't be
> repeated.
> 
> Rgds,
> -drc
> --------

The world is different now, than in the IPng days. Enterprises, governments,
providers, and individuals now utilize the Internet for a plethora of
economic and personal applications. There is no longer a clean slate.

Way too much of this discussion ignores this. If IPv6 PI space isn't
available, is more difficult to get, or there are more hoops to jump
through, there will be no IPv6, as we know now it.

We do not have a free hand. If the wrong decisions are made, they may be
ARIN's last decisions. The failure of IPv6 and the RIR exhaustion of the v4
space may lead to a market-driven system that may evolve considerably
different regulatory mechanisms.

Consensus decision making breaks down after a certain point. I'm thinking we
are approaching that point.

- Dan