[arin-ppml] the bad 240/4 idea, was Solving the squatting problem

Michel Py michel at arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us
Fri May 17 15:53:30 EDT 2019

> Owen DeLong wrote:
> IPv6 unicast addresses were allocated to ARIN for allocation and assignment. 
> The addresses were in ARIN inventory and there was an erroneous view that
> IETF had authority to dictate registration policy for those addresses.

That was definitely not the view of the IETF. I can remember some private discussions that were not exactly politically correct. You did good on that one, we were so stuck into that multi6 mess.

> David Farmer wrote :
> If you are a believer in IPv4-Only

I'm not a believer of anything, I just do whatever I can or must. I'm leaning that way tough, because I'm getting tired of people trying to shove IPv6 down my throat when I can't afford it. I have DECNET on my production network. I have HPUX, VMS, Netware, OS/2 Warp, and any flavor of Linux and Windows you can name. I have T1s. I don’t get to pick what's on the network, I just have to make it work.

I know what IPv6 is. I was on the 6bone. I hate to break it to you, but at $job[0], it's not even on the agenda.

We are heading straight towards the balkanization of the Internet.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list