[ppml] FW: 2006-7 IPV6 Initial Allocation suggested changes-InputRequested

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
> 
> Yes, the policy facilitate to create a lie to allow those cases (even dual
> stack cases for new ISPs which also need to lie if they don't have a plan,
> or start business with IPv4, wait and then get allocated the IPv6 block).

My main concern is that the policy allow for an orderly migration to
IPv6 when the perception of IPv4 address scarcity catches up with the
reality.  The current isp/pi policies do that very well.

For the v6 only case, the only requirement is that you dream big, which
most entrepreneurs do to begin with.  I mean this seriously, i'm not
using 'dream' as a euphemism for 'lie'.  The only reason for this is
to prevent unconstrained and impractical routing table bloat.

Yet still you can do v6 only and dream small by getting space from
an upstream provider.  Compare this to the current v4 policy which
essentially doesn't allow startups to dream big but requires them to
start small with space from an upstream provider in most cases.

It is very likely that a more restrictive policy similar to the
way v4 is done will be required in the future (if/when v6 is
adopted on a wide scale) to constrain route bloat.

- Kevin