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

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Thu Apr 21 00:07:16 EDT 2005


> I'm missing something here.  This is what I am either assuming or think I
> am hearing:
> 
> 1) The RIRs require that ISPs be prepared to sign up 200 customers in 5
> years in order to get space (via the policy).  Only ISPs can get space.
> 
No.  LIR, not ISP.  This distinction is significant, because, for example,
Chevron IT with 200 subsidiaries/locations/etc. (or just a plan to have
that many in the next yyy timeframe) can qualify as an RIR (not picking
on Cheveron, insert any company you wish).  They don't have to be an ISP,
or even really be providing connectivity under the current policy.  Just
address space.  Of course, the impact on the routing table if they are not
providing sole-source connectivity...  Anyway, that's the current policy.

> 2) Customers are having trouble with a technology that requires putting
> faith into ISPs, an industry that has proven quite economically unstable
> in recent years.
> 
Yes.

> 1+2 seems to imply that supply and demand will have a hard time
> materializing.
> 
Supply has materialized and met with resounding lack of demand.


> How does IPv6 gain momentum when adopters at the edge of the network
> (customers) can't get space without having to rely on (and pay money to)
> a core infrastructure that has a poor (recent) track record for business
> stability?
> 
IPv6 has huge inertia already.  It has been gaining ground very slowly
for years.  It will continue to do so until something occurs to make it
more attractive to the real users of the internet.


> (Thinking of a recent discussion of SSH vs. DNSSEC in another forum -
> innovation at the edge vs innovation at the core and adoption rates.)
> 
> I understand that from an engineering perspective, IPv6 addressing ought
> to be handled by the ISP (the layer 3 service provider) (- that sounds
> very POTS-like).  But this seems hard to achieve when business is
> considered.  Engineering vs. Economics.
> 
Even the POTS providers have been forced into address portability.

Owen

-- 
If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20050420/48fc9533/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list