[ppml] 2005-1:Business Need for PI Assignments

[David Conrad]

Ben,

While I understand the position you put forward, if addresses are not 
obtained from providers, then the address prefix will need to appear in 
all default-free routers through which connectivity is desired.  It is, 
of course, true that at this point in time there is plenty of space in 
the "global routing tables", the question is, will that last for the 
lifetime of IPv6?

Many people feel it would be wise to learn from previous mistakes.

Rgds,
-drc

On Apr 20, 2005, at 7:48 AM, Benjamin Crawford wrote:

> It is extremely important to realize that
> organizations, with responsibilities to their
> customers and shareholders, will not be willing to
> move forward with IPv6 if their v6 allocations will be
> tied in to a specific service provider.  This point
> was made by several representatives at the PPM in
> Orlando and needs to be given strong consideration.
> IPv6 acceptance will continue to be prolonged until a
> time that a policy or technology is put in to place
> that will not bind an organization to a service
> provider due to an IPv6 allocation.  At this time, the
> policy should be supported to help get v6 off of the
> shelf and accepted by many of the businesses out there
> who are starting to look at this new protocol.   -Ben Crawford
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>