[ppml] Last Call for Comment: Policy Proposal 2003-4

[Mury Johnson]

As the original author of this policy proposal I have a couple
questions/comments.  Please note that this current form has almost nothing
left of my proposals.

It seems that this policy change has been watered down to the lowest
common denominator of desired change.  It seems as though every issue with
some teeth has been removed due to different people having different
problems with it.  That's fine, but I don't think the policy proposal in
it's current form is going to do a whole lot to encourage the adoption of
IPv6.

Sure one hurdle has been lowered, but there are other outstanding issues.

In addition, I find it slightly amusing that a lot of the opposition to my
original proposal was that the time periods for waiving fees and
extending the time frame for the 200 customers was too long.  People were
commenting that any time extensions should be a year or two at the most!
Well here we are over a year later and to the best of my knowledge IPv6
hasn't taken any huge steps toward common deployment, and the proposal to
do something about it has been delayed over and over.

Please don't take that the wrong way.  I am not trying to blame anyone.
I'm merely trying to point out that it is taking too long to do too
little.

If this policy proposal is adopted can it at least be done in conjunction
with a significant fee waiver?  Say... the first 1000 ARIN->LIR blocks are
free for four years...  The fees have already been waived 2-3 times over
the last four years.  The fear that ARIN is going to lose out on this big
pot of money is unfounded.

Or, how about every current customer that is already paying ARIN fees for
IPv4 can get a free IPv6 block?

Everyone is comfortable in their IPv4 world.  There have been numerous
arguments that the technology will be developed and then the demand will
come.  That hasn't happened either.  How many years need to go by before
people are going to be willing to acknowledge that IPv6 needs a good kick
in the ass in ARINland?

People have lost their tolerance for being the front runners in hopes of
cornering market share.  The majority of LIRs are going to wait until
moving to IPv6 is either risk-free or until everyone else is doing it and
they need to.

Put a little meat back into this policy change, or combine it with a
*real* waiver of fees. Just my thoughts...

Mury



> Quoting Member Services <memsvcs at arin.net>:
>
> > This is a last call for comment on this policy proposal.
> >
> > The Advisory Council has determined that there was community support
> > for this policy proposal. The AC will review the comments collected
> > during this last call period.
> >
> > Please send your comments to ppml at arin.net.  This last call will
> > expire at 23:59 EST on June 4, 2004.
> >
> > Member Services
> > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
> >
> >
> > #######################################
> >
> >
> > Policy Proposal 2003-4: IPv6 Policy Changes
> >
> > Author: ARIN Advisory Council
> >
> > Policy term: permanent
> >
> > Policy statement:
> >
> > A. 5.1.1(d), which currently reads: "d) have a plan for making at
> > least 200 /48 assignments to other organizations within two years"
> > will have the timeframe changed from "two years" to "five years".
> >
> > B. 5.1.1(d) will have prepended "be an existing, known ISP in the
> > ARIN region or..."
> >
> > Rationale:
> >
> > These changes to the initial allocation criteria are to acknowledge
> > the slow pace of IPv6 deployment in the ARIN region. Also they further
> > stress the availability of IPv6 allocations to existing service
> > providers in the ARIN region.
> >
> > The following is section 5.1.1 as it currently is in the ARIN IPv6
> > Address Allocation and Assignment Policy document:
> >
> > 5.1.1. Initial allocation criteria
> >
> > To qualify for an initial allocation of IPv6 address space, an
> > organization must:
> >
> > a) be an LIR;
> >
> > b) not be an end site;
> >
> > c) plan to provide IPv6 connectivity to organizations to which it will
> > assign /48s, by advertising that connectivity through its single
> > aggregated address allocation; and
> >
> > d) have a plan for making at least 200 /48 assignments to other
> > organizations within two years.
> >
> > The ARIN IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy is available
> > here:
> >
> > http://www.arin.net/policy/ipv6_policy.html
> >
> > Timetable for implementation: 30 days after ratification
> >
> > !DSPAM:40acf6a089461161118278!
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>