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

[michael.dillon at bt.com]

> This is the most sane thing I've heard in this conversation.  
> Frankly, I'm baffled by the hard architectural boundary at 
> /64.  Perhaps I'm limited in vision,

The IETF working groups are over there http://www.ietf.org

This is the ARIN public policy where we make policy on numbering
resources that have been defined by the IETF and delegated to us by
IANA. If you don't like the way that the IETF designs things, head over
to their working groups and tell them, in excruciating detail, why they
are wrong and you are right. You can even write an Internet draft submit
it.

As far as I am concerned, the minimum size of address allocation for a
single IPv6 interface on a single device is /64. That's the way the IETF
designed it and documented it in their RFCs. Whether or not I choose to
use Ethernet MACs (48 bits) or random numbers (64 bits) or Paul's choice
of a /124 for that /64 identifier is irrelevant. The IETF designed it
the way it is and ARIN should not change that. Paul can change it if he
wants to because it is his network, and therefore his rules. And Paul
also has the skill to fix things up if the law of unintended
consequences bites him some day. ARIN needs to be more prudent and stick
closer to the RFCs.

--Michael Dillon