[ppml] Waiver of IPv6 Fees

[David Conrad]

The ARIN clients?

On Monday, January 6, 2003, at 11:46  PM, John M. Brown wrote:

> hmm,   for those that are not ARIN clients, that means
> they aren't an LIR, and as per 511 of the policy, they
> can't get space...
>
> unless I'm missing something.....
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: David Conrad [mailto:david.conrad at nominum.com]
>> Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 11:58 PM
>> To: john at chagres.net
>> Cc: 'Bill Woodcock'; william at elan.net; ppml at arin.net
>> Subject: Re: [ppml] Waiver of IPv6 Fees
>>
>>
>> I would be very interested in hearing the details as to why
>> they could
>> not get space.
>>
>> Rgds,
>> -drc
>>
>> On Monday, January 6, 2003, at 06:02  PM, John M. Brown wrote:
>>
>>> There are multiple ISP's in NM that would like to
>>> start building v6 networks.  Some are ARIN clients, most
>>> are not.
>>>
>>> They can't get the space.  We have stalled the system.
>>>
>>> Cool apps won't be built without people playing around and
>> building.
>>> Like Bill says, this isn't how things are done.
>>>
>>> john brown
>>> former AC member
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On
>> Behalf Of
>>>> Bill Woodcock
>>>> Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 4:50 PM
>>>> To: william at elan.net
>>>> Cc: ppml at arin.net
>>>> Subject: Re: [ppml] Waiver of IPv6 Fees
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Just to be clear - I'm basicly for what Bill Woodcock
>>>> is proposing, I just
>>>>> think it should have been done slightly differently.
>>>> But if nothing else,
>>>>> doing ip allocations by ARIN to individuals for small
>>>> or no charge to
>>>>> encorage deployment will work too. I just want it to be
>>>> clear from the
>>>>> start that such allocations would be temporary and not
>>>> like swamp space...
>>>>
>>>> I'm not for temporary.  I think that's exactly the problem we have
>>>> now. Nobody's willing to invest themselves in getting it going,
>>>> because they know that success means that they have to
>> start paying
>>>> someone else for the privelege of using what they just
>> built.  That's
>>>> not the way things get done on the Internet.
>>>>
>>>>                                 -Bill
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>