[arin-ppml] GUA vs ULA vs ?

[Thomas Narten]

> > 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.

This is nonsense. The IETF, like the RIRs, have had multiple, long and
ultimately inconclusive discussions about ULA-C, with no consensus on
how to move forward. The ULA-C document died in the IETF some 2 years
ago when there wasn't support to move it forward. Tony may be updating
that document, but that doesn't mean it will receive a different
reception than it has in the past. :-)

My sense is that neither the RIR community nor the IETF have had
concensus on whether to move ULA-C forward. If something has changed,
I'd like to understand what has changed and whether that warrants
reopening the discussion based on new or different thinking. What I
fear, however, is a repeat of the same long, passionate and
inconclusive discussion that has been had several times before.

Thomas