[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-3: Tiny IPv6 Allocations for ISPs

[Paul Vixie]

Steven Ryerse wrote:
>
> I agree with Mathew and CB.  We do need to move away from conservation
> at the RIR level as a goal for both ipv4 and ipv6.  Ripe is definitely
> on the right track with
> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2013-03 and I strongly
> support that.  The same changes should happen for the Arin RIR.
>

i know that it's a popular viewpoint -- many folks feel that the time
for needs based allocation is over and that the invisible hand of the
market is now capable of optimizing the holding of address space and the
aggregation level of that space into routing table entries.

so i thought i'd chime in: i consider that case to be extremely unmade
as yet. even though i am in most other ways a free-marketeer. as
stewards of a public resource ARIN has always been guided by RFC 2050
which requires recipients of these public resources to justify their
need, no matter whether these resources are coming from a central pool
or a private transfer.

paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20130407/2bf168ca/attachment.htm>