[arin-ppml] GUA vs ULA vs ?

[Lee Howard]

----- Original Message ----
> From: "michael.dillon at bt.com" <michael.dillon at bt.com>

> Our job, in an RIR, is to craft a policy that will mesh nicely
> with what the IETF produces. As part of that we can expect 
> the IETF to make some accomodations for RIR needs, but we
> cannot expect ULA-C to go away or for the IETF to sanction
> the RIRs carving out some "special" blocks of GUA addresses.
> If the RIRs can't agree on this, and the debate gets too 
> acrimonious, then the IETF can, and likely will, create ULA-C
> anyway, and have IANA run the registry directly. That would
> be damaging to the RIR community. I hope that 
> we don't let that happen, 

I consider myself a participant in ARIN and IETF, and I think
our job is, applying the principles of stewardship, to allocate 
Internet Protocol resources; develop consensus-based 
policies; and facilitate the advancement of the Internet 
through 
information and educational outreach.
It is possible for operators to decide to operate their networks 
contrary to IETF documents, and to tell ARIN they want
something other than what the IETF published.  Two examples
are the change in HD-Ratio threshold, and documentation of
/56 assignments.

There's also a constant cry that the IETF needs more
participation from operators.  If operators here want something
different than what the RFCs say, they should join a couple of
working group mailing lists and participate.  It is not the duty of
ARIN participants to make policy that is consistent with IETF
product.

IMHO; I have not discussed the above with anyone.

Lee