[ppml] 2006-2 v6 internal microallocation

[Robert E.Seastrom]

Jason Schiller <schiller at uu.net> writes:

> Would people be more infavor of 2006-2 if it has a sundown clause that
> would require an orgization to return the internal microallocation once
> there is a fully deployed suitable protocol alternative that alleviates
> the need for an internal microallocation?
>
> Or should the ARIN membership simply revoke this portion through the
> public policy mechinism when that time comes? 

I don't think we would have any better luck getting back internal
microallocations than we would getting back ostensibly publicly
routable microallocations.  Given the vastness of IPv6 space and the
fact that we're not taking up a slot in the global routing table, I'm
not sure why we would bother anyway.

The thing about which I wonder more though is why a codified sunset
for the allocation, which basically forces a migration upon the
adopters at such time as ARIN decides that you can stick a fork in the
technology because it's baked, would make the policy proposal more
(instead of radically less) palatable?  Am I missing something here?

                                        ---Rob