[ppml] Incentive to legacy address holders

[John Santos]

On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> 
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: John Santos [mailto:JOHN at egh.com]
> >Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 3:59 PM
> >To: Ted Mittelstaedt
> >Cc: Leo Bicknell; ppml at arin.net
> >Subject: RE: [ppml] Incentive to legacy address holders
> >
> >
> >On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> >
> >> 
> >> 
> >> >-----Original Message-----
> >> >From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of
> >> >John Santos
> >> >Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 6:47 PM
> >> >To: Leo Bicknell
> >> >Cc: ppml at arin.net
> >> >Subject: Re: [ppml] Incentive to legacy address holders
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Under these circumstances, I can't see any sense in doing anything
> >> >else but what we are doing now, continuing as a legacy, non-RSA-
> >> >signing holder.
> >> >
> >> 
> >> I guess you think your pretty smart in that you have outlined a
> >> situation you think isn't solvable in IPv4.
> >> 
> >> So, when all your customers have switched over to IPv6 and are
> >> demanding that you do the same, it appears to me you will be still
> >> in exactly the same circumstances.  You customers will still be natting
> >> under IPv6 - if you don't think so, go ask them now.

You don't know my customers.  They strongly believe in "if it ain't
broke, don't fix it."

(In case you totally have the wrong end of the stick, my customers
are *NOT* buying any sort of internet service from us.  We use the
internet as a tool for supporting our customers.  They typically
have enormous internal networks, and may eventually implement v6
on them, but there is no prospect they'll be turning off v4 for
decades.  Switching to v6 for this function would be a pointless
waste of time for both us and them.)

> >> 
> >> So what are you going to do then
> >> Mr. Smarty?  You won't have any legacy class C to fall back on since
> >> there isn't an equivalent in IPv6?
> >
> >What a jerk!!!  
> 
> Exactly what I thought when I read your post.

Shut up, he explained.

> 
> >I described precisely and accurately as I could
> >my exact situation.  If you think it is invented, then you are
> >totally full of it.
> >
> 
> I never said it was invented.  I said you outlined a situation you think
> isn't solvable.  Since you failed to respond to my question as to what
> are you going to do about IPv6, I wonder if your more mad that someone
> poked an obvious hole into your scenario than anything else.
> 
> >> People can always justify not even trying to follow the rules.
> >
> >Bull.  I followed the rules, as written, in 1993.
> >
> 
> And I'm sure that all those people who registered variations of
> coca-cola domain names and had them taken away when the Domain Name
> System changed the rules to allow notable trademarks to take precidence,
> made similar arguments.  This argument is as invalid as arguing 
> you shouldn't be given a ticket by a cop for drunk driving because
> back in 1993 the legal limit for intoxication was higher, and
> while your over the 2007 limit your not over the 1993 limit.

Totally bogus analogies.  Why don't you propose the police go back
to their records and charge with drunk driving anyone they stopped
with a breathalyzer reading below what was then the threshold but
is now above the threshold?  

> Face the facts.  Your getting something for nothing.  Your getting
> tracking and visibility in a system you aren't paying for - in fact,
> in a system that -I'm- paying for.  (or more accurately, my employer,
> who due to paying for this system has less money he can pay me, and
> so forth)  You certainly don't seem appreciative of this.

I never said I wasn't willing to pay my fair share for *something*
(like v6 addresses.)  I'm not willing to pay, agree to terms I did
not originally agree to, and risk losing my /24 for no discernable
benefit to me.

> 
> It seems to me that your doing nothing more than fulfilling the
> stereotype of the "evil legacy holder" that some people claim I'm
> saying exist (even though I've never made any such claim)

Yet another ad hominen attack.  You really have nothing to stand
on except your own prejudices, do you?

> 
> And, as I asked before, how are you going to move your setup to
> IPv6?
> 

I didn't answer this before because I don't spout nonsense off the
top of my head, unlike some people I could name, and I need to do
a bit of research before answering, but at least three possibilities
come to mind:  1) I believe there is a class of addresses that can
be generated from IPv4 addresses, and I can just use those.
2) Apply for v6 addresses through the normal process.  3) If I
don't qualify for 2 because my network is too small, then form a
cooperative with some of the 20,000 other legacy class C holders,
pointlessly duplicating the work of ARIN, etc. but aquiring enough
v6 addresses for all of us.

If any of this is wrong, or unworkable, *you* are the one who insisted
on an answer...  If you're so damn smart, what would you do?


> Ted
> 
> 

-- 
John Santos
Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.
781-861-0670 ext 539