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

[Owen DeLong]

--On Tuesday, November 09, 2004 03:34:41 PM -0500 adb at onramp.ca wrote:

> Owen DeLong wrote:
>> I can?t speak for Leo, but, the obvious source of confusion
>> in my mind is that when presented with a free /32 and a /32
>> that costs money from ARIN, someone running a router somewhere
>> is going to ask the obvious question of ?Why is my free globally
>> unique /32 any less routable than my ARIN /32??  When he comes
>> to the conclusion that given global uniqueness, there is absolutely
>> no technical reason whatsoever and that the rest is essentially
>> hand-waving by the IVTF, it won?t be long before a discussion
>> with his ISP leads to his /32 being effectively globally routed.
>
> Pay your ISP enough money and he'll BGP-announce your 192.168.xxx.0/24
> prefix too, but that doesn't win you much when virtually all other
> players filter 1597-space.
>
> This draft appears on the face of it to be simply an IPv6 version of
> RFC 1597 with the added benefit of uniqueness, so that you and your new
> corporate brothers aren't using overlapping address space internally.
> (See also RFC 1627 in this regard.)
>
> The big question is how the backbone players will react, and I'll hazard
> a guess that all FC00::/8 prefixes will be filtered, so you won't get far
> with your globally-unique-but-not-globally-routable prefix.

So... we absolutely agree on everything except two points:


1.	You see uniqueness as a benefit in the case of site-local
	(RFC-1918 which deprectaed RFC-1597) space.  In general,
	I´d even agree with this except for point 2 below.

2.	You believe that ISPs will do the right thing about these
	prefixes.  I believe that the moment ¨the right thing¨
	comes up against capitalistic greed, greed will win
	almost every time, especially if ignoring the right
	thing has no consequences.  If you believe me to be
	wrong on this point, please cite historical examples.
	If you need me to cite historical examples of cases where
	greed has won over the right thing, please consider:

	NSI site-finder (only removed because ICANN forced the issue
		and then, greed still didn´t accept the right thing,
		they sued ICANN over it)
	Microsoft embrace and extend strategy
	The reasons some of us are starting to regard it as IVTF
		instead of IETF

	This is a small set of recent examples from a much much
	larger historical set.

Owen