[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 118: IPv6 Subsequent Allocation
marla.azinger at frontiercorp.com
Mon Jun 21 11:45:36 EDT 2010
Thank you Michael. This is the kind of feedback we're looking for. We've gotten responses in both directions so far and we decided it would be good to vet it out seperately to see which one the community really supports.
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of michael.dillon at bt.com
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 6:44 AM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 118: IPv6 Subsequent Allocation
> The 6rd prefix is an RIR delegated IPv6 prefix. It must encapsulate
> IPv4 address and must be short enough so that a /56 or /60 can be
> to subscribers.
I'd rather see this kind of policy restricted to only 6RD unless someone can come up with a descriptive term that includes 6RD and similar
IPv4 address mapping transition technologies so that the policy isn't wide open to any and all crazy schemes that someone dreams up.
Basically tailor a policy to 6RD for temporary allocations that have to be returned when 6RD is no longer needed. Make the language general enough so that it also covers a plan that improves on 6RD but if the plan requires permanent allocations, then reject it because it ain't better.
Similarly if the plan doesn't allow for returning the allocations at the same time 6RD users are returning theirs then it ain't better, reject it, and force the ISPs to use 6RD instead.
This is not an area where we want or need to encourage too much creativity. This is an area where you want quick cheap belt and braces solutions that can be dismantled as soon as possible in favor of native v6.
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML