[ppml] Policy Proposal Name: IPv6 Assignment Size Reduction
stephen at sprunk.org
Wed Nov 14 14:33:59 EST 2007
Thus spake "Cort Buffington" <cort at kanren.net>
> I agree completely with Yurie. This proposal only proves that the
> policy-makers at ARIN are incapable of thinking in the IPv6
> paradigm, and continue to think that IPv6 is IPv4 with larger
> address space.
A proposal is just that: a proposal. More importantly, it's by an
individual, and it's up to the rest of us "ARIN policy-makers", including
you, to say whether we think it's a good or bad one. The AC will determine
whether there's consensus either way.
Speaking for myself only, I think this proposal falls in the "bad" category
for two main reasons. The first is (as you note) that it's applying IPv4
thinking inappropriately to IPv6; there is no shortage of bits to worry
about in IPv6, and we shouldn't be trying to import the nightmares of subnet
sizing, defeating one of IPv6's few advantages. The second is that, based
on comments at the recent meeting, it becamse clear to me that "guidelines"
do not belong in the NRPM, only concrete requirements that staff can apply
to requests; this proposal not only fails to fix that problem with 22.214.171.124
but indeed makes it worse.
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
More information about the ARIN-PPML