[arin-ppml] IPv6 as justification for IPv4?
farmer at umn.edu
Thu Apr 18 14:58:06 EDT 2013
On 4/17/13 12:55 , John Springer wrote:
> Paste from arin-discuss, from an exchange between Owen and Randy Carpenter
>>> I think the real problem here is requiring pre-existing PA space of
>>> certain amounts as the initial test. The combination of a customer
>>> base, need, and efficient utilization of any PA space is probably the
>>> better test.
>> This is something that I believe really needs fixed (and needs to be
>> fixed very quickly).
> This seems to be rather far along to a problem statement. I agree with
> both statements.
> John Springer
While not policy text this is still more about the solution than the
problem. There needs to be more about why "requiring pre-existing PA"
creates undesirable results for example, or how current policy effects
new ISPs businesses in undesirable ways. A problem statement needs to
motivate why change is necessary as well as how to solve it. So, what's
wrong with the current policy? Not just what should the new policy look
like. In the above I mostly only see what should the new policy look
like and almost nothing about issues created by the current policy.
David Farmer Email: farmer at umn.edu
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952
More information about the ARIN-PPML