[arin-ppml] IPv6 Transition Policy (aka Soft Landing)

[Joe Maimon]

Chris,

Your pill needs more sugar coating.

I could only be comfortable with something like this were it to be 
accompanied by a much larger framework for reserved pools of addresses, 
address pools which had other qualifiers for eligibility, such as new 
organizations, organizations with no existing or seriously limited 
resources, one-shot open to anybody pool, and similar.

I also would like for such a proposal to encompass more or the entirety 
of the last /8 and to be refilled by returns/revokes if/when they occur.

A proposal that pits ARIN dictates against needs and desires of its 
members is not good policy. A balance must be struck. Rewards need to be 
offered to offset punishments.

Impedance mismatches between policy IPv6 dictates and 
business/self-interest goals will cause real issues and resentments.

Trying to force people to do things they would not do otherwise is a 
risky proposition.

Something that casts ARIN as the real bad guy would be enough for me not 
to support a proposal even were it to have the net positive benefit of 
locking down more resources at a lower burn rate.

Thanks,

Joe



Chris Grundemann wrote:
> Problem Statement:
> We have failed to deploy dual-stack in a meaningful way in time to
> avoid transition problems
>
> Objectives:
> -1- Encourage IPv6 deployment prior to depletion
> -2- Enable growth of IPv4 where IPv6 is being deployed
> -3- Improve the utilization of IP addresses
>
> High-Level Requirements:
> -1- ARIN will only make allocations and assignments for networks that
> have already deployed production IPv6
> -2- Any IPv4 addresses received under this policy, must be deployed
> along side of IPv6
> -3- This policy will encourage deployment of IPv6 in existing IPv4-only networks
>
> Rough Policy Text:
> ~ Requester defines classes in their network - only classes where IPv6
> is in production qualify for IPv6
> ~ New addresses must be deployed on dual-stacked interfaces plus one
> additional existing IPv4-only interface must be dual stacked, up to
> 80% of all interfaces.
> ~ The service that the address is used to provide must be fully IPv6
> accessible (if you deploy an A record, you must also have a AAAA and
> both must answer)
> ~ All end-sites must dual-stack all Internet facing services before
> getting this space
> ~ For each down stream customer site where these addresses are
> deployed, another pre-existing IPv4 only down stream site must also be
> IPv6 enabled, up to 80% of the total customer base.
>
>
> This is an emergency, let's get something together ASAP. All feedback
> is extremely welcome and greatly appreciated; this problem is all of
> ours. If you are still here in Atlanta come find me, Marty Hannigan
> and/or Jason Schiller to discuss.
>
> Thanks!
> ~Chris
>
>
>