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

[Edward Lewis]

At 11:48 -0700 4/25/05, Owen DeLong wrote:
>I fear this discussion is drifting far afield from where it was intended
>to go.
>
>This is the ARIN PPML.  We can't change the basic decisions made by the IETF
>here.  We can only control ARIN resource policy.

Right - but to make informed decisions about policy, there is a need 
to understand the ramifications.

>The decision to make every subnet a /64 and issue /48s or more to every
>end site (for a very strange definition of the term site) that requires
>more than one subnet was made in the IETF.  If you want to change that,
>you need to get involved in the V6 Working Group.

I don't want to change it.  I want to know why the decisions made in 
the IETF are driving the policy here.  Color me skeptical.

>Policy 2005-1 is about trying to get provider independent allocations for
>organizations which would not otherwise qualify as LIRs.  While, to some
>extent, the current rules were specified by the IETF, that is, in my
>opinion, more in the realm of policy than design.

We have "PI space" in IPv4.  Why not have it in IPv6?  That is, if 
there is no difference between IPv4 and IPv6 when it comes to 
resource management.

But then I hear that v4 and v6 are vastly different.  How so?  Should 
we take a hard line and prevent "PI space" in IPv6 to force 
correctness?

>While the /48 and /64 decisions could be policy, given the current constraints
>and assertions in the V6 protocol specifications, it is not a policy decision,
>but, a design decision.  Design is clearly in the realm of IETF.  Policy has
>some overlap, but, I believe in the long run that the RIRs must be the ones
>with the majority of influence over policy.

2005-1 is a policy, and that is in the subject of the message.  Is it 
a good idea or not?  That is a policy question.

>As such, let's focus here on what we can do within the realm of policy.

The IETF focuses on design, not on education.  PPML focuses on 
policy, not on education.  Where should people go to get educated on 
the design to offer informed opinions on policy?  If the PPML is not 
for education, is it for "stumping"?  How do we reach consensus if 
there is no arena in which to hear and consider differing opinions 
and viewpoints.

>
>Owen
>
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:Untitled 828 (    /    ) (0009C06F)

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

If you knew what I was thinking, you'd understand what I was saying.