[arin-ppml] 125

Frank Bulk frnkblk at iname.com
Sat Jan 8 00:37:48 EST 2011

Why are people saying that prop 125 results in "ARIN ... dictating who
spends what where", as if that's something special.  Pretty well all of
ARIN's policy have an effect on an organization's operational behavior.  You
mean I can't assign a separate IPv4 /24, using only one IP, for one
residential customer?  That's right -- ARIN's policy requires certain usage
levels, which changes what might be my preferred default behavior.

So if the charge is that prop 125 forces an organization to do something,
sure, that's right, but that's no different than ARIN's other policies.
What seems to be bothering some people is that prop 125 will make it more
difficult for some people to obtain IPv4 address space which will force
looking at alternative solutions (greater efficiency of current space, or
move toward IPv6).  Well, I can make the argument right now that ARIN's
current policies result in changes in my operational behavior.


-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
Behalf Of Vaughn Thurman - Swift Systems Inc
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 10:25 PM
To: 'Jack Bates'
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 125

> Honestly, the problem is implementation readiness and pricing. Vendors
have often pushed the better IPv6 stacks to their newer gear only, pushing
> price of deploying into a proper IPv6 layout higher. In addition, not all
problems have been resolved by most/all vendors.

> So the policy proposal is to strong arm people into spending money on more
expensive crap hardware solutions to deploy something that is far inferior
>  what they currently have instead of letting them wait until vendors can
work the bugs out and market pricing can come down to a reasonable level.

Jack, I think you made my point here much more succinctly, and a bit less
controversially than I did.

Despite the schoolyard responses, there is a simple point here.  It is NOT
the business of ARIN to be dictating who spends what where, and prop 125
does that.  It's simply out of scope.  We don't need to encourage IPv6, it
is as inevitable as the morning sun tomorrow!

I feel like we are debating a policy designed to get the sun to rise faster
and everyone will need to buy stock in "SunComeUpCo" now or else.

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:
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list