[ppml] PIv6 for legacy holders (/w RSA + efficient use)

[James Hess]

> The actual policy changes could be as simple as updating the wording in
> 6.5.8.1 to read "qualify for an IPv4 assignment or allocation from ARIN
> under the IPv4 policy currently in effect, or demonstrate efficient
> utilization of a direct IPv4 assignment or allocation covered by a
> current ARIN RSA."
>
> Would you support such a policy proposal?  Do you think it would provide
> a useful means for legacy holders to migrate to IPv6?  Do you think the
> requirements are reasonable enough that legacy holders like yourself
> would take ARIN up on the offer?  Would you/they be willing to sign an
> RSA and demonstrate efficient utilization of existing space (or renumber
> and return unused space) in order to get provider independence in IPv6?

The proposal is a good idea in that it COULD help some legacy holders to be more
open to ipv6 migration, and sign up in the process.

I suggest the legacy holders that are most likely to naturally want to
migrate are
ones that  _need more_ address space, after it is exhausted, and have
little choice
but to take up the offer.  This doesn't seem like a carrot for the
legacy holders that
have plenty of address space for for the next 20 years.

Having policy provide options like this doesn't hurt, but not likely
to make such legacy
assignees suddenly have any reason  to migrate, unless they already
want V6 space it's not a carrot for them.


Assume there is eventual widespread migration to V6, then V4 assignees
start getting
left out and can't communicate with with an increasingly large part of
the world moving
to V6.

Well, at that point, there is no reason ARIN should provide them an
extra carrot.
Legacy assignee at that point will have every reason to apply for V6 space and
sign a RSA;

Since moving to IPv6 will have become a necessity at that point: I
think ARIN should
not give them extra incentives just for having been assigned legacy V4 space.

I.E.  Set a deadline on any extra "carrots" for V4 legacy holders to
sign the RSA
and get V6 space to automatically expire say some time around 2010, when V6
will have become a necessity.

Such deadline should in the future be adjusted (moved earlier or
later), depending
on V6 adoption.


If legacy assignees hold out too long to take up the offer to get V6
space in addition
to the V4 space and an RSA, let them eventually lose the special
opportunity, and be
subject to the same requirements as any other org applying to hold V6 space,

including signing a RSA for any V4 blocks they may hold, and doing any
internal renumbering and returning of blocks required in order to be
efficiently utilizing the
V4 space.


So yes, you have a carrot, provided V6 is ever adopted.

If the carrot is left open forever without expiration, the legacy assignee has
no impetus to act "now" rather than later, however, seeing as V6 isn't even
particularly usable yet.

--
-J