[ppml] [address-policy-wg] Re: article about IPv6 vs firewalls vs NAT in arstechnica (seen on slashdot)

[Owen DeLong]

On May 22, 2007, at 1:51 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

> On 15-mei-2007, at 9:57, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
>
>> And the only way to control ULA-central is to have it within the
>> RIR system,
>
> How would that work in practice? Approximately 100% of all
> organizations use RFC 1918 space. Obviously one use for RFC 1918
> space goes away with IPv6 (NAT) but I'd say that the number of
> internet users requiring some kind of local addressing will still be
> 10, 20, 30 or more percent. The RIR membership is measured in
> thousands. So tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of
> organizations that may want ULA-c space have no relationship with an
> RIR. They may not even have a relationship with an ISP...
>
First of all, at least in the case of ARIN, membership is not a  
requirement
for obtaining Address space.  I realize that in RIPE and APNIC,
membership is required.  However, nobody actually NEEDS local
addressing, technically.  Technically, people NEED addressing.
The distinction between local and global addressing is mostly
an administrative convenience. There is no local addressing purpose
for which global addresses are inadequate or infeasible.

I'm quite sure that the RIRs can handle additional business  
relationships
just fine. If someone has neither a relationship with an ISP nor a
relationship with an RIR, then, one of those two things will have
to change before they get addresses assigned.  Same way things
work today, except for RFC-1918 and ULA-Local.
> So how are the RIRs supposed to manage their relationship with 10 or
> 100 times as many people as they have relationships with now?
>
Same way they do now.  Might require beefier or more servers, and an
increased staff, but, I would expect that with 10-100 times the fees  
rolling
in, that won't be a problem.

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20070522/ee8a1a90/attachment.p7s>