[ppml] 2005-1 status

[David Kessens]

Bill,

On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 10:30:38AM -0600, Bill Darte wrote:
> scott wrote: 
> > So why are we specifying PI-for-everyone as the remedy?  Why 
> > not just give IPv6 PI space to those who qualify for IPv4 PI 
> > space (for now), and wait until later to give out 
> > PI-for-everyone only if necessary?
> > 
> > -Scott
> 
> I don't think I have taken a position of PI-for-everyone.  I think
> we might rather consider our obligation to provide PI space to those
> who NEED it...but that the NEED is not solely determined by
> arbitrary thresholds. Those who have it now or could justify it
> under current policy is a 'safe' starting point for that discussion
> it seems.....like right where we are in my estimation.

Why would this be less arbritrary ? The fact that somebody has a lot
of ipv4 address space now doesn't mean they need a lot of ipv6 address
space as well (maybe even to the contrary :-)).

Allocating ipv6 address space to organizations who articulate a clear
need for ipv6 address space seems the least arbritrary criteria for
getting them ipv6 address space.

Again, this whole distinction between PI and provider aggregated
address space is artificial. 

Why would a small provider with a plan for 200 customers who uses less
address space for itself and its customers than a medium sized
business for just its own business get more address space than the
medium sized business ?

We need a policy that allows organizations of similar size, complexity
and growth rate to get similar sized allocations. It really doesn't
matter whether you are an ISP, business, non-profit or some hybrid
structure.

David Kessens
---