[arin-ppml] Solving the squatting problem
marka at isc.org
Thu May 16 22:08:58 EDT 2019
240/4 isn’t ARIN’s to allocate or do you think ARIN should squat on the space? :-)
> On 17 May 2019, at 11:48 am, Michel Py <michel at arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> wrote:
>> Joe Provo wrote :
>> By all means, go tilt at the class e windmill if you like;
>> it will only be the fourth time or so, I can't recall.
> I was trying to convince Owen to co-author with me ;-)
>> But it isn't anything for ARIN policy, so feel free to take it up at the IETF...
> I would not waste more time there.
> ARIN is the entity having the squatting problem : we have members who use the resources of another member and they should not.
> There is precedent, Owen will remember that I'm sure. During the early days, there was no IPv6 multi-homing solution. The RIRs, not the IETF, started to allocate IPv6 PI addresses to organizations who wanted to multi-home, while there was no such thing as IPv6 PI. I remember that the IETF was not happy with that, but it worked : since then, we have IPv6 multi-homing, the good old way that works, not any of the dirty hacks that were on the table at the time.
> ARIN allocates 240/4 for private unicast to ARIN members.
> Maybe we could convince Geoff and APNIC to try the alternative way.
> Long shot, I know.
> Owen, you allow your vision of "all IPv6" to cloud your judgment. Turning IPv4 off is not going to happen for decades.
> 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.
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka at isc.org
More information about the ARIN-PPML