[ppml] [address-policy-wg] Those pesky ULAs again

[Leo Bicknell]

In a message written on Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 05:22:21PM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> What's the other half of the work?

The transition from IPv4 to IPv6 was supposed to provide the
opportunity to introduce new technologies and procedures that could
make renumbering easier, make multi-homing scale better, make running
a box with multiple IP addresses easier, and I'm sure do a lot of
other things.  Basically they have all been left by the side of the
road.  What's left of them seems to be eternally stuck inside the
IETF.

My point is, if none of these technologies exist, and we run out
of IPv4 addresses creating a "mad rush" to IPv6 enable that the
RIR's and operators will have no choice but to provide IPv6 PI to
anyone who has IPv4 PI today.  We're already seeing that happen.
Once we have a 200,000 route IPv6 table, and everyone has PI space
not only will there be no interest in all of these technologies but
there will be active resistance as those with PI already will see
it as a step backwards, and those without PI will see it as inequality.

Now, considering we have to write code and deploy it, the IETF is
all but out of time.  If they can't get some of this technology
documented and out the door in the next 6-18 months then the IETF
should just shut down all work on them, as they all become moot.

Does anyone at the IETF understand that, or am I the only one with this
view?

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20070602/7bbdaa41/attachment.sig>