[arin-ppml] Alternative to proposal 125: Requiring IPv6 planning for IPv4 allocations

[Martin Hannigan]

That's not what the PDP says and that's not my experience.  And if it
is a requirement we should revisit that.

Best,

-M<

On 1/10/11, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> You have to publicly post your support for the petition.
>
> You can send your contact details privately in parallel to your public
> statement of support, but, you have to provide both your statement
> of support (which must be public) and your contact details (which
> can be private) in order for support of a petition to be counted.
>
> (At least that is my understanding of the process).
>
> Owen
>
> On Jan 10, 2011, at 2:50 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>
>> Scott,
>>
>> The Suggestion:
>>
>> The reason why I am supporting "some" iteration of 125 is that one of
>> it's benefits is that it requires a measure of cost sharing across the
>> board which is likely to end up being much more burdensome to all
>> without something along the lines of 125. Much of the discussion about
>> 125 has been related to cost and demonstrates some of the inequities
>> in our policies. 125 seems to be somewhat of a right sizing albeit
>> theoretically could be a degree or two too far to the right. Your
>> modification doesn't seem to do anything significant other than
>> instill a false sense of security in applicants that are likely to do
>> nothing without some requirements.
>>
>> Aside from completely throwing out the intent of 125 as you did with
>> your modification, how would you contribute to make 125 more palatable
>> and continue to allow it to have some level of bite, a real result for
>> all of the effort that we're going to have to go through with respect
>> to IPv6 transition?
>>
>>
>> Staff,
>>
>> The Petition:
>>
>> I was about to remark that everyone should be reminded that you do not
>> have to post publicly to support a petition due to the level of
>> causticity of the subject, but I'm unclear if that's the case. I had
>> responded privately to a petition previously and I believe it was
>> counted, but don't recall being told otherwise.  I checked the PDP and
>> it seems vague with respect to any requirement to post to PPML. The
>> interpretation that a response to ARIN directly should suffice would
>> be reasonable IMHO.
>>
>>    https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
>>
>> Could someone on the staff clarify that please?
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> -M<
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 7:38 PM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Given the contentious discussions around proposal 125, I'm getting the
>>> sense that even if its petition succeeds, it'll be too controversial
>>> to gain consensus.  So I thought it might be worth posting an
>>> alternative I drafted, and see what kind of reaction it gets.  I don't
>>> intend to introduce this into the policy process myself (as I'm not
>>> convinced it's necessary), but if anyone (particularly supporters of
>>> 125) feel that it would be a step in the right direction, feel free to
>>> do so.
>>>
>>> I'd also be interested to hear if anyone would be opposed to this
>>> language, and if so, what aspects you object to.  And, as always,
>>> suggestions for improvement would be most welcome as well.
>>>
>>> -Scott (speaking only for myself)
>>>
>>> 4.1.8  IPv6 transition
>>>
>>> All organizations requiring IPv4 addresses for Internet connectivity
>>> or services must demonstrate a plan for interoperating with IPv6-only
>>> portions of the Internet.  Components of such plans might include, but
>>> are not limited to: receiving IPv6 address space and using it for
>>> dual-stack or parallel IPv6 deployment; or making use of translation
>>> technologies to allow communication between IPv4 and IPv6 hosts.
>>>
>>> 4.2.1.7  IPv6 connectivity
>>>
>>> ISPs requiring IPv4 addresses from ARIN must demonstrate a plan for
>>> connecting their customers with IPv6-only portions of the Internet, as
>>> detailed in section 4.1.8.
>>>
>>> 4.3.7  IPv6 transition
>>>
>>> End-users requiring IPv4 addresses from ARIN must demonstrate a plan
>>> for interoperating with IPv6-only portions of the Internet, as
>>> detailed in section 4.1.8.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PPML
>>> 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.
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> 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.
>
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device