[arin-ppml] Encouraging IPv6 Transition (was: Clarify /29 assignment identification requirement)

[Michael Richardson]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


>>>>> "Owen" == Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> writes:
    >> The math for statistical uniqueness in ULA, while internally
    >> correct, is based on some suspect assumptions. If you replace
    >> them with worst-case assumptions, the probability of collision
    >> when interconnecting two large organizations increases to
    >> something on the order of 1 in 1000. Maybe higher if you consider
    >> human factors as well.

    Owen> So what... He said he wanted equivalent functionality to
    Owen> RFC-1918 where your risk of collision is more like 1 in 3 at
    Owen> best and usually 1 in 1 in my experience.

RFC1918 risk of collision is the reason to argue for IPv6 in the first
place.  I work for one company that decided that squatting on 2.0.0.0/8
for their chassis communications was better than conflicting with RFC1918.

But, I didn't say it was risk of collision with ULA-R that was the
main problem, it is lack of reverse DNS and lack of whois that is the
problem.   

- -- 
]       He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life!           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] mcr at sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
   Kyoto Plus: watch the video <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzx1ycLXQSE>
	               then sign the petition. 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Finger me for keys

iQEVAwUBT7PDkoCLcPvd0N1lAQKK2Qf/SoHMCFZ9Xls0xX/aGLkhL7LecTHPfwmP
jQxUvuxWooSAq4yaFnFck+rzB3mE2aCX89H/4jJ5IaThdHwjR3oJ/f+gLSDvEyub
ipZTWCpxPHZbG+kE1DZpdpw04ZXfSRpR+w3eibjTXA8mTQOWBwNuRfP2QyLyhNxG
lbz5Au4Hz0vXzmHrsFkXwfuM4kOC84oYw2S16wNIAB2HHM8/S5MjNrwuosic6aJI
UsUjRg0B5tbVprLBWNvRQT7WRlp7UUVk7c4tqyy+MTuZxAxf/wzWYOS9335HsSuv
f/BvFrrrNvUAByd60dlIHcO+iC0FB4B/RPALagr2EwWfvSP5FpvfkQ==
=/K3Z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----