[ppml] Policy Proposal 2005-1: Provider Independent IPv6 Assignments for End-sites - Revised Text

[Hannigan, Martin]

> 
> There is just too much religion about not giving PI space to "small" 
> organizations
> to achieve consensus around the original 2005-1.  Between the AC 
> representatives
> that worked with us, Kevin (who authored another similar 
> policy which was 
> merged
> with 2005-1), and myself, we decided that this was the best 
> way to go to 
> achieve
> consensus and get a policy on the books.
>
 Policy statement
 Add new subsection to the NRPM:

 d. must be able to assign IPv6 addresses to at least 100,000 unique
    devices within 1 year and advertise that connectivity through it's
    single aggregated address assignment.

 I support the policy for the most part and I would like to say
 so publicly. I don't have an issue with the device count in 
 terms of how it's applied in the rationale, but I wonder if you 
 might not consider extending the time frame of assignment to 2 
 years instead of futzing the device count since it seems that this 
 may be the focus? Using the most conservative count I can 
 think of, I found it difficult to execute something this large, even 
 as an SP, in one year. I also imagined myself standing up in front 
 of the funding commitee explaining why I only had a year
 and I felt I may be unable to justify it in 1 year. 

 The rationale is to be conservative, but  holding this to only the 
 Fortune 10 and cellular carriers seems to be slightly tilted towards 
 detrimental to the adaptation and use of IPV6.

Thank you!


  Martin