[arin-ppml] An article of interest to the community....
scottleibrand at gmail.com
Fri Sep 2 17:35:57 EDT 2011
On Sep 2, 2011, at 1:51 PM, Jeffrey Lyon <jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 2, 2011, at 9:22 AM, Jeffrey Lyon <jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net> wrote:
>>> I've been speaking out from time to time on this same subject. Most of
>>> the support for the /10 of shared transition space seemed to have this
>>> same goal in mind (deplete IPv4 faster). Many recent proposals or
>>> rejection of new proposals appear to have the same end goal (kill
>>> IPv4, advance IPv6).
>> That's not the impression I get. While there are definitely some
>> anti-stewardship sentiments expressed here, they don't hold much
>> weight with me, and I don't get the impression they are very
>> influential in the overall result of the policy process.
>> In fact, one of the main goals of the shared /10 was to conserve IPv4
>> by sharing it. If we wanted IPv4 to run out faster, we would've let
>> each ISP get their own block of space and not allowed them all to use
>> the same one.
> I specifically recall some comments to the effect of "Support if it
> will help use up IPv4 space faster" when we were first discussing
> shared transition space.
Yes, there were such comments. Since IMO their "if" conditional is
false, and since if it were true such a sentiment would contravene
ARIN's mission, statements like that don't hold much weight with me,
and I don't get the impression they are very influential in the
overall result of the policy process.
More information about the ARIN-PPML