[ppml] 2005-1 status

[Owen DeLong]

I would assume that in such a case, it would be a separate namespace
from the internet IPv6 addresses.  If they want to use 128 bit integers,
let them do so, no problem for us, but, if they want to reserve network
infrastructure numbers from PI blocks to number humans, well, that's
just not a good idea in my opinion.

Owen


--On January 31, 2006 1:56:09 PM -0500 Doug Montgomery <dougm at nist.gov>
wrote:

>> Message: 3
>> > Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:42:21 +0000
>> > From: Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com
>> > Subject: Re: [ppml] 2005-1 status
>> > To: ppml at arin.net
>> > Message-ID:
>> > 	<OFEE09AA75.B4E23BE1-ON80257107.0034FA07-80257107.003550E8 at btradianz.
>> > 	com>
>> > 	
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>> > 
>>> >> Think about it: McDonalds would qualify for a /31 (or so) under this
>>> >> proposal, as much or more than most ISPs.  They'd be able to assign a
>> > /64 to
>>> >> _every hamburger they sell_, not just the stores.  While I'm sure
>>> >> that
>> > would
>>> >> be entertaining, is this a reasonable policy direction?
>> > 
>> > I thought that IPv6 policy already specifies that addresses
>> > are to be used for Internet infrastructure. In that case
>> > the only way Macdonalds could assign an address per hamburger
>> > would be to embed a network device within the sandwich. I think
>> > it is highly unlikely that network devices containing poisonous
>> > materials would ever be embedded within edible products.
>> > 
>> > So then, where in 2005-01 does it override the existing
>> > policy and allow assigning addresses for uses other than
>> > network infrastructure?
>> > 
>> > --Michael Dillon
> 
> 
> While I will not argue if we are more or less disposable or networkable
> than hamburgers,  I have become aware of plans to assign valid IPv6
> addresses to all US Gov employees, contractors, etc as part of the
> HSPD-12 process.
> 
> http://www.smart.gov/iab/documents/PACS.pdf
> 
> "The Federal Government has defined the GUID as a mechanism to enable
> issuance and acceptance of physical access credentials beyond federal
> agency participation. The GUID is defined as an IPv6 address and is
> anticipated to become the standard for credential numbering in federally
> managed PACS."
> 
> While I am not sure that this is a good idea, either from the HSPD-12
> perspective or the IPv6 perspective, it is a proposed plan.
> 
> If this plan goes forward, I would assume I would want PI space for such
> a use, independent of my qualifications for network infrastructure.
> 
> Are there ARIN policies, existing or proposed, that would support the
> allocation of IPv6 addresses for such uses?
> 
> dougm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML mailing list
> PPML at arin.net
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml



-- 
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/20060131/e2974f12/attachment.sig>