[ppml] Proposed Policy: PI assignments for V6 (and v6 fees)
michel at arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us
Tue Dec 7 22:00:13 EST 2004
> Owen DeLong
> ULA OTOH creates at least an illusion of uniqueness,
> giving any end-site with a quarter of a clue no
> reason not to expect their ISP to route it.
Indeed, and since numbers of these end-sites would be willing to pay a
reasonable fee to ARIN to get PI space, they would just transfer the
payment from the RIR to their ISP.
> My only objection to ULA is that it is PI under
> an insidious name.
It's actually worse, because in most cases ULAs would not be traceable
back to the source because they would not be registered. Even
everyone-can-get-one, low $$$ PI direct from ARIN to the end-site would
be better than ULAs-turned-PI.
> If we're going to have PI, let's call it PI and
> allocate it sanely. If we're going to claim no
> PI space, then, let's not create PI space.
I made that point myself earlier, and this is where your proposal has
merit, because unlike ULAs that try to dissimulate what they really are,
your proposal calls for a debate on the real issue: do we or do we not
want to create PI addresses for v6 and if yes what would be the policies
to allocate them.
More information about the ARIN-PPML