[ppml] Version think... was: alternative to 2005-1

[David Williamson]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 05:52:14PM +0000, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> 	we -are- doing things - numbers are being assigned, wiht justifications
> 	that meet -todays- operational demands.  changing policy now to conform to
> 	an ideal that does not exist now and may not exist for years seems 
> 	counter productive to me.

Yes, numbers are being assigned.  If you aren't a provider, though, you
aren't getting any numbers except from a provider.  I'm not a provider.
I don't want to be locked in.  If I put on my blinders and act very selfish,
the current policy doesn't work.  Ergo, policy must change.

I simply want to see a reasonable PI policy for IPv6 created.  I'm
pretty flexible on the 'reasonable' part, too.  At this point, I'm
willing to compromise to the point where I won't qualify for space...if
we need to do some sort of experiment with PI space to soothe the
community's concerns, let's do it!

The only course of action I find indefensible is to do nothing.  This
isn't an ideal of some future need.  The need is here.  (Actually, I'll
back away from that.  Ignoring the fact that we'll eventually run out
of v4 space, I'm happy to stay in v4 and never have to deal with v6 at
all.  I just think that's an unwise step for my business.)  If we ever
want to see IPv6 take off in the ARIN region (it seems to be getting
traction elsewhere), then we need to do something with PI space.

Here's something I havem't seen in this thread yet: what are the other RIR's
doing with PI space?  Do they have policy regarding alloctions?  Has there
been a rush for it?  Or are the other RIRs in the same boat as ARIN, and other
regions are just more inclined towards dealing with PA space?  (I admit to
a highly US-centric view of how things are run.)

-David