[arin-ppml] IPv6 Heretic thoughts

[Kevin Kargel]

Inlines by Kevin Kargel --  

> On Sep 5, 2008, at 2:22 PM, Kevin Kargel wrote:
> > The industry that we are in is more than a business, we have direct 
> > impact on society and quality of life, and thereby we have 
> more than 
> > normal responsibility to safeguard the public interest (Use 
> the power 
> > wisely, Luke)..  Our decisions cannot be based entirely on business 
> > and bottom line.
> >
> > I am a median line capitalist, and I do believe that capitalistic 
> > drivers are good and necessary for shaping business.  
> Having said that 
> > it is expressly the cooperative anarchy that has let the internet 
> > develop into the wonderful and functional entity that it 
> is.  Without 
> > the free thinking methods of open source and the tremendous 
> works of 
> > organizions such as ARIN the various standards bodies the Internet 
> > would not have evolved into the amazing thing we have today.
> 
> Kevin -
> 
>     I'm not advocating for (or against) a more relaxed
>     transfer policy, but I'm wondering if you have an
>     alternative suggestion on how to best encourage
>     existing legacy holders that have some address
>     space which could be freed up with significant
>     effort to undertake the task?   Some of the

First off, I do not accept the desperate need to force legacy holders to
give up any space.  This would not change anything, would not provide a
solution, and would only forstall the inevitable so that the rest of us can
procrastinate in dealing with the problem.  I do not even believe that the
time gained would be critical or necessary to arriving at the solution.

Attacking the legacy holders because they continue to hold what was freely
given them when we didn't think we needed it is nothing short of mob action.
We have explained the need to them, I think they understand it, and I trust
they will have the community spirit and compassion to respond when it is
needed if we allow them an easy path to keep what they require to meet their
own needs.  People tend to do what is good when given a choice, but if I am
presented with an ultimatum I have been known to pridefully spite a noseless
face. I don't expect the legacy holders to be any different.

I hope and believe that we have evolved past the point that our best
recourse is strongarm police actions.

BTW, I am not - nor (to my knowledge) have I been - a legacy holder. I hold
no office or interest in ARIN other than as a common member and I aspire to
no office.


>     suggestions to date have been a relaxed transfer
>     policy, asking nicely and thanking them loudly,
>     government intervention, or giving up completely
>     since it may only provide us a few more years of
>     IPv4 block general availability.

I think we should do nothing more than encourage and support our peers,
offer assistance and education and resources, allow the community to exhaust
IPv4 space under current rules, begin to use IPv6 space, and we will arrive
at the same place at the same time but we will have taken a different but
more ethical route.  

Network administrators are over-worked understaffed people who tend to be
crisis driven and do not have a lot of choice about which issues they can
tackle this week.  I hope that they are taking IPv6 in to account (I know I
do) when planning hardware upgrades.  I believe that the majority of network
administrators are talented ethical people who will do what they can when
they can and that the problem will be dealt with in the nick of time.  There
will be enough forward thinking industry leaders to create a wave front for
the rest to ride on. (As an aside, good network administrators have more
than a normal quantity of ego and *like* to be known as edge leaders.)

We can and should expect legacy holders to update their contact information
to allow better response to malicious or otherwise negative network traffic.
I do not think we should or have any right to demand additional or punative
recompense in excess of current agreements (or lack thereof) for this
action.  A side effect(it should not be the primary driver) is that we can
identify and reclaim abandoned space based on the lack of response.

> 
>     Are you thinking that a relaxed transfer policy
>     isn't needed, or just that it isn't worth the
>     potential consequences?

I strongly feel that the side effects of a transfer policy are so
detrimental to the community and to society as to greatly outweigh any
benefits.  

> 
> /John
> (solely responsibility for the above thoughts and those 
> photons emitted from displays as a result)
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3107 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20080905/4568adae/attachment.bin>