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

Kevin Kargel kkargel at polartel.com
Thu Jun 7 10:16:28 EDT 2007

Wouldn't it be nice if we had a ULA bit or two to play with in the BGP
announcements?  Then everyone could define their own..
I know this is facetious and not a serious consideration, but it was an
interesting thought..


	From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
Behalf Of Roque Gagliano
	Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 8:57 AM
	To: Randy Bush
	Cc: Thomas Narten; ppml at arin.net; address-policy-wg at ripe.net
	Subject: Re: [ppml] [address-policy-wg] Those pesky ULAs again
	more "practical" questions: 
	why should they be cheaper than PI block? do they take less
administrative work form RIR? do they take less "space" in their

	in many RIRs you need to pay a "membership" fee and doing so you
get the right to vote in their members meetings, if you get an ULA-C
allocation, should you be considered a member? would you pay your
membership fee to the RIR? again, why should this allocation be cheaper
that a PI allocation?


	On Jun 7, 2007, at 10:54 AM, Randy Bush wrote:

			Should ULA-C be published in the Whois database?
what about reverse DNS
			for them, should they be delegated or just reply

		let's see.  ula-c should be assigned and tracked by
rirs.  they should
		have whois and in-addr.arpa.  do remind me how they
differ from pi
		space.  i keep forgetting.


	Roque Gagliano
	rgaglian at antel.net.uy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20070607/2a35057c/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list