[ppml] IPv6 initial allocation policy

[Tony Hain]

Owen,

One consideration for 2005-1 is what happens when IPv4 space runs out? A
related question is what if IPv4 PI space becomes harder to get over time? 

Fundamentally, why should IPv6 PI space have anything to do with IPv4 PI
space? 

Tony


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of
> Owen DeLong
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 11:29 AM
> To: Anthony A. Crumb; ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [ppml] IPv6 initial allocation policy
> 
> I don't know about a coalition of companies, but, in the ARIN region,
> there
> are at least 2 policy proposals under discussion to try and resolve this
> issue.  Kevin Loch and I have authored 2005-1 which is one of the
> proposals.
> Andrew Dul has authored 2006-4 which is the other.  2006-4 is more
> restrictive
> and limited to much larger organizations (requires 80% utilization of at
> least an IPv4 /19 and makes no allowance for sites which do not already
> have at least a /19 IPv4 direct assignment).
> 
> I hope you will support 2005-1 as I believe it provides a solution to
> not only the largest and wealthiest companies, but, also to any company
> currently eligible for IPv4 PI space.
> 
> Owen DeLong
> Policy Author
> DeLong Consulting
> owen at delong.com
> 408-921-6984
> 
> 
> --On March 13, 2006 10:07:27 AM -0600 "Anthony A. Crumb"
> <Crumb_Anthony_A at cat.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > My organization has begun working through the definition of an
> enterprise
> > IPv6 acquisition, allocation, and deployment strategy. I was charged
> with
> > identifying the process required to acquire IPv6 address space from the
> > three registrars (ARIN, RIPE, and APNIC) from which we currently have
> > carrier independent IPv4 allocations. Our thoughts are, because we have
> a
> > dual carrier connected Internet POP within each of these IPv4
> allocations
> > we should request provider independent IPv6 space from each of the
> > registrars. Imagine my surprise when I found that each registrar has
> > adopted a policy that does not allow for the assignment of carrier
> > independent IPv6 address space to end customers. This policy runs
> counter
> > to an obligation to our customers, supplier and dealer to provide no
> less
> > than two connection paths into and out of our Internet facing network
> > application environments. Not to mention robbing us of the leverage
> > needed to be able to shop our very considerable WAN circuit business
> > between carriers. Is anyone aware of a coalition of companies that is
> > working together to over turn this policy?
> >
> >
> >
> > Anthony A. Crumb
> > Enterprise IP/DNS Management
> > Global IT Solutions, Caterpillar Inc.
> > Email: crumbaa at cat.com
> > Phone:  309-494-7816
> 
> 
> 
> --
> If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.