[ppml] Draft ARIN Recomendation on draft-ietf-ipv6-ula-centra l-00.txt, take 2

[Bill Darte]

I agree with all of Michael's comments below.

Bill Darte
ARIN AC
CAIT at Washington University in St. Louis

Michael Dillon wrote the following responding to Leo Bicknell's draft:

> 
> >   ]  ARIN on behalf of the ARIN membership and constituents believes
> >   ]  that the proposal in draft-ietf-ipv6-ula-central-00.txt will be
> >   ]  harmful to the future of the IPv6 Internet.  ARIN 
> recommends that
> >   ]  this draft NOT be adopted by the IETF.
> >   ]
> >   ]  The particular issues seen by the ARIN membership and 
> constituents
> >   ]  that relate to ARIN are:
> 
> I don't like this part. And I don't see how ARIN as an 
> organization can make this kind of decision before the next 
> member meeting.
> 
> 
> >   ]  - The proposal calls for a  a new "RIR" type function by fiat,
> rather
> >   ]    than using the existing processes to create these sorts of
> >   ]    organizations.
> 
> Seems like a valid complaint.
> 
> >   ]  - The proposal calls for an RIR function to be 
> provided at no fee
> >   ]    to the end user, and with no method of funding the 
> RIR functions.
> >   ]    ARIN believes the IETF should not discuss fees in engineering
> >   ]    drafts.
> 
> Seems to be picking nits. IETF drafts can say anything about 
> anything. It's the RFCs that don't discuss fees and I would 
> hope that is sorted out by the normal RFC editing process.
> 
> >   ]  - The proposal is likely to create confusion in the ARIN region
> >   ]    about which prefixes can be routed on the Public Internet.
> 
> This is confusing to me but then I haven't looked at the 
> draft recently. Perhaps you could say what it is in the 
> proposal that would create 
> confusion.
> 
> >   ]  - If the prefixes in the proposal become globally 
> routed by major
> >   ]    Public Internet ISP's it has the potential to impact ARIN's
> >   ]    viability.
> 
> I've always hated arguments that boil down to "If you do this 
> it will hurt me".
> 
> If you feel strongly about commenting on the draft, then 
> please send your comments directly to the IETF mailing list. 
> If you talked to people at the ARIN meeting and want to pass 
> on their concerns then 
> please do so. But I think you are wasting your time with this 
> idea of drafting a letter that ARIN in toto will send to the IETF.
> 
> I don't think the ARIN membership decision making cycle time 
> is conducive to commenting on IETF drafts. If you really feel 
> that ARIN needs greater involvement in IETF activities then I 
> suggest that we should urge the AC or the Trustees or the 
> ARIN employees to take on that role.
> 
> --Michael Dillon
> 
>