[arin-ppml] ULA-C

Fred Baker fred at cisco.com
Wed Mar 31 20:16:29 EDT 2010

Dumb question.

The complaint with ULAs as presently formulated is that there is a non-zero probability of them colliding.

If you give a prefix to your favorite admin and have them number their network with it, and then re-assign the prefix to someone else, what's the probability that you have a collision?

I think you need to accept that once put into use, a ULA will be in use by that administration permanently. You obviously see otherwise.  Fill me in?

On Mar 30, 2010, at 9:06 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:

> On Mar 30, 2010, at 7:50 AM, Scott Leibrand wrote:
>> Tony,
>> The draft looks good to me.  There is one item that I think might not have consensus here on PPML at least:
>>>  The allocation and registration authority ...
>>>   must include the ability to make an allocation on a permanent basis,
>>>   without any need for renewal.
>> I'd like to hear feedback from other folks on the tradeoff between permanent allocations vs. requiring renewal to maintain whois database consistency...
> Permanent bad.  Renewal good.
> Owen
> _______________________________________________
> 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:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list