Last Call for Comment on New IPv6 Policy
bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
Mon May 7 16:49:36 EDT 2001
- Previous message: Last Call for Comment on New IPv6 Policy
- Next message: Last Call for Comment on New IPv6 Policy
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> As I read the proposed text, it references an Internet Draft: > http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iesg-ipv6-addressing-recommenda > tions-00.txt > > The earliest date on which the ARIN Board will take up this issue is at our > meeting on July 27. For a number of reasons, I would propose that the > Board replace this reference, if appropriate, with the most suitable > version of the specification available as of that date. Reasons include: > > 1) It is, of course, poor practice in general to reference an I-D in any > permanent document or policy. Since the other RIRs have adpoted policies based on this draft, it seems prudent to have ARIN do the same. I would hope that instead of the draft being referenced, that an ARIN local copy would be referenced instead. > 2) This particular draft will have EXPIRED before the Board takes up the > issue (Six months from a publication date of January 23, 2001 is July 23 or > thereabouts). Yes, we have taken far too long in getting this done. > 3) The authors are revising the document to reflect some important > understandings about responsibility for administration of the bits to the > left of the /48 dividing line, consistent with presentations made to the > ARIN Public Policy meeting. This draft does not reflect those changes. The proposed changes are significant enough that it obscures the inital premise, i.e. /48 is a good first cut. The IESG proposal is not based on operational experience but is a rough draft of what might be reasonable, after the experiences w/ the /48 have been collected. I beleive that we should consider the new IESG proposal in the 3rd or 4th quarter of this year... AFTER we get the first policy in play. > 4) There is a reasonable chance that a clean version will be available as > an RFC before the ARIN Board meets. Not even. The RFC process is far too slow these days. > Makes sense? > > Cheers, > - Scott > > > > > > > ----------- > J. Scott Marcus Phone: +1 781.262.3075 > Chief Technology Officer (CTO) FAX: +1 707.313.7548 > Genuity Inc. > 3 Van de Graaff Drive, P.O. Box 3073, room 25/2046A > Burlington, MA 01803 E-mail: smarcus at genuity.com > U.S.A. WWW: http://www.genuity.com/index.htm > > "There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, > or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction > of a new order of things." -- Niccolo Machiavelli (The Prince, 1513) >
- Previous message: Last Call for Comment on New IPv6 Policy
- Next message: Last Call for Comment on New IPv6 Policy
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the V6WG mailing list