[ppml] IPv6 flawed?

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of
>Dean Anderson
>Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 6:34 PM
>To: Kevin Kargel
>Cc: ppml at arin.net
>Subject: Re: [ppml] IPv6 flawed?
>
>
>> I also still maintain that we should let them continue to use them,
>> but because it is right, not because it would be illegal to do
>> otherwise.
>
>It is right. And it is also illegal to do otherwise (well, illegal isn't
>the precisely correct word. It violates the legal rights of the legacy
>in the license/lease to do otherwise; 'illegal' usually suggests there
>is a law that would be violated by doing so, which isn't the case
>

This whole Legacy Holder argument is moot anyway because the Legacy
holders were given IPv4 not IPv6 numbers.  Numbers that will become
obsolete sooner or later.  The entire Legacy Holder argument/discussion
can be ignored as it is a self-terminating system.

The only value the Legacy holders numbers have on today's Internet is
in use of possibly extending the period of IPv4 before it expires.  I
will point out that if the Legacy holders sit on unused IPv4 allocations
and do not return them to the RIRs, then it merely shortens the time
that IPv4 will remain viable - and thus hastens the deadline where the
Legacy holders themselves must switch over to IPv6.  "Look mommy,
their screwing themselves" she exclaimed in amazement.

As for the speed limit analogy, I feel compelled to add that while it
sounds great in principle in reality, speed limits are also set by
political decisions in addition to engineers comments - while sometimes
they are decisions that may help society - such as the energy-saving
55 mph limit, or the decision to lower speeds around schools - many
other times they are not helpful to society - such as "speed traps"
where speeds are lowered in order to generate ticket revenue in some
po-dunk small town in the sticks.

But the most important problem with the speed limit analogy is that
the ability of drivers and their vehicles is not quantifable except
as an average.

An engineer may conclude that a speed limit of 75Mph is safe on a highway
with a gentle 3 degree radius turn - but this is assuming average
vehicles and average driving skills.  It may NOT be safe at all for a
pickem-up truck jacked way up into God's ass on gigantic donut tractor
tires, driven by Redneck Billy and his bird huntin' dog.  And it's margin
may be well execeeded by the 'vette with sticky tires driven by a
skilled driver.

I can certainly say that an engineer isn't going to use the 'vette driven
by the skilled driver as the variable in his math equation used to determine
a safe speed.  Nor is he going to use the pickemup truck.  So, despite
whatever mathmatics are used to determine a speed limit - the limit itself
remains arbitrary because the variables that went into the equation are
arbitrary.

So, while fun, a poor analogy I think.

Ted

PS  So when we are all driving hybrids running on biodiesel, and the
justification
of foreign oil dependence doesen't exist anymore, can I look forward to the
recinding of the double-nickel speed limit?  Yeah, sssuurree I can.