[arin-ppml] ULA-C vs. "GUA-Tainted"

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Thu Mar 25 13:44:47 EDT 2010

	I apologize for creating more confusion than I solved by incorporating
a new term.  My intent was to distinguish the policy considerations being
discussed, not to create an entire new class of addressing.

	ULA-C is being discussed as an ultra-lightweight allocation process
		with no justified need, no policies, and very low fees.

	Such a construct would be disastrous to the internet as it would,
overtime, get (mis)used in place of routable GUA because it's easier
(and cheaper) to get.

	My intent with the introduction of the term GUA-tainted was not
to create another class of address space, but, to talk about trying to
move the allocation/assignment criteria towards a point where they
would be acceptable to all communities...

	Those that want GUA should be able to get GUA and route them
or not based on whatever agreements they work out with an ISP
to do so. ARIN's role is to distribute the addresses in the interests of
the community, not to police the routing table or make value judgments
about the worthiness of various networks. ARIN has traditionally
had to take some of these latter things on in IPv4 because of address
scarcity and the tradeoffs it forced.  In IPv6, it is time to move the
routing table management back to the ISPs and remove the value
judgments other than basic justified need (number of networks
needed, number of sites, etc.).

	Those that want addresses which should not appear in the
global routing table by convention, be they ULA-C or some other
prefix, should also be able to get them. Those that want some of
each should be able to get them.

	What is important is to make sure that the only driver pushing
one to either class of address space above is the nature of their
application and their desired implementation. It should not be
a fee or policy issue. If it is, then, the less expensive or easier to
get address space will get (mis)used as the other type.

	I hope this clears up the misconceptions about "ULA-C"
vs. "GUA-Tainted". If we implement something like "GUA-Tainted"
I expect it would be issued from the ULA-C prefix.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list