<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:v =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1 =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3527" name=GENERATOR><!--[if !mso]>
<STYLE>v\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
o\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
w\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
.shape {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
</STYLE>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType name="place"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType><!--[if !mso]>
<STYLE>st1\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#ieooui)
}
</STYLE>
<![endif]-->
<STYLE>@font-face {
font-family: NewCenturySchlbk;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Tahoma;
}
@page Section1 {size: 8.5in 11.0in; margin: 1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; }
P.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
LI.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
H1 {
FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; MARGIN: 12pt 0in 3pt; FONT-FAMILY: NewCenturySchlbk
}
H2 {
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 12pt 0in 3pt; FONT-FAMILY: NewCenturySchlbk
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
A:visited {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
P {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
P.SPCI-503Report {
FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; MARGIN: 12pt 0in 3pt; TEXT-INDENT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: NewCenturySchlbk; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1
}
LI.SPCI-503Report {
FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; MARGIN: 12pt 0in 3pt; TEXT-INDENT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: NewCenturySchlbk; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1
}
DIV.SPCI-503Report {
FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; MARGIN: 12pt 0in 3pt; TEXT-INDENT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: NewCenturySchlbk; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1
}
SPAN.EmailStyle20 {
COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-style-type: personal-reply
}
DIV.Section1 {
page: Section1
}
OL {
MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in
}
UL {
MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in
}
</STYLE>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US vLink=blue link=blue>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=925593418-30052009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>I support the principle of this proposal, but am somewhat
taken aback by the idea that /32s would be the basic unit for smaller,
innovative v6 entities. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=925593418-30052009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Aren't /48s, which still constitute a huge number of
addresses, enough? Or am I missing something here?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT size=2>Milton Mueller<BR>Professor, Syracuse University School of
Information Studies<BR>XS4All Professor, Delft University of
Technology<BR>------------------------------<BR>Internet Governance
Project:<BR><A
href="http://internetgovernance.org/">http://internetgovernance.org</A><BR></FONT></P>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=Section1>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<HR tabIndex=-1 align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: blue 1.5pt solid; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Tahoma size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">From:</SPAN></FONT></B><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">
arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net] <B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">On Behalf Of </SPAN></B>Stacy Hughes<BR><B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Friday, May 29, 2009 9:25
AM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> Member
Services<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Cc:</SPAN></B>
arin-ppml@arin.net<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B>
Re: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Open Access To
IPv6</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Hello Everyone,<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Before we really get started on this policy proposal,
I must give credit where credit is due.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Jordi Palet Martinez brought this topic to the table 3
years ago, and it got shot down. I myself, in my small IPv4-centric
mind, thought it impossible that an IPv6 only organization could exist.
Operations and innovation have shown me the error of our
thinking.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">To quote myself from a different
list:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN class=apple-style-span><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">IPv6 is a new paradigm we are supposed to
be doing our best to encourage. As it stands, those community guys can't
get it, the <st1:place w:st="on">Caribbean</st1:place> guys can't get it, and
basically anyone trying to do anything vanguard can't get it either. (I
hear the ULA objections here, even when they're <SPAN
style="webkit-background-clip: initial; webkit-background-origin: initial"></SPAN></FONT></SPAN><SPAN
class=il><SPAN style="BACKGROUND: #ffffcc">nascent</SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><SPAN
class=apple-style-span>). </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN class=apple-style-span><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">We can be afraid of what IPv6 might do to
the routing table, or we can embrace what IPv6 can and will do for the
Internet.</SPAN></FONT></SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN class=apple-style-span><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">I choose the latter and support this
proposal.</SPAN></FONT></SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN class=apple-style-span><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Stacy </SPAN></FONT></SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Member Services
<<A href="mailto:info@arin.net" target=_blank>info@arin.net</A>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">ARIN received the following policy proposal and is
posting it to the<BR>Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) in accordance with
Policy Development<BR>Process.<BR><BR>This proposal is in the first stage of
the Policy Development Process.<BR>ARIN staff will perform the Clarity and
Understanding step. Staff does<BR>not evaluate the proposal at this time,
their goal is to make sure that<BR>they understand the proposal and believe
the community will as well.<BR>Staff will report their results to the ARIN
Advisory Council (AC) within<BR>10 days.<BR><BR>The AC will review the
proposal at their next regularly scheduled<BR>meeting (if the period before
the next regularly scheduled meeting is<BR>less than 10 days, then the period
may be extended to the subsequent<BR>regularly scheduled meeting). The AC will
decide how to utilize the<BR>proposal and announce the decision to the
PPML.<BR><BR>In the meantime, the AC invites everyone to comment on the
proposal on<BR>the PPML, particularly their support or non-support and the
reasoning<BR>behind their opinion. Such participation contributes to a
thorough<BR>vetting and provides important guidance to the AC in their
deliberations.<BR><BR>The ARIN Policy Development Process can be found
at:<BR><A href="https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html"
target=_blank>https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html</A><BR><BR>Mailing list
subscription information can be found<BR>at:<A
href="https://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/"
target=_blank>https://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/</A><BR><BR>Regards,<BR><BR>Member
Services<BR>American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)<BR><BR><BR>## *
##<BR><BR><BR>Policy Proposal Name: Open Access To IPv6<BR><BR>Proposal
Originator: Stacy Hughes and Cathy Aronson<BR><BR>Proposal Version:
1.0<BR><BR>Date: 29 May 2009<BR><BR>Proposal type: modify<BR><BR>Policy term:
permanent<BR><BR>Policy statement:<BR><BR>1) Remove “by advertising that
connectivity through its single<BR>aggregated address allocation” from article
3 of section 6.5.1.1<BR><BR>2) Remove article 4 of section 6.5.1.1, “be an
existing, known ISP in<BR>the ARIN region or have a plan for making at least
200 end-site<BR>assignments to other organizations within 5 years” in its
entirety.<BR><BR>Rationale: It is acknowledged that these concepts have been
put before<BR>the community in the past. However, with the wisdom of
actual<BR>operational experience, the necessity of promoting IPv6
adoption<BR>throughout our region, and emerging native v6 only network models,
it<BR>becomes obvious that these modifications to the NRPM are
necessary.<BR>Removing the 200 end site requirement enables smaller, but no
less<BR>important and viable, networks access to IPv6. Removing the ‘known
ISP’<BR>requirement enfranchises new, native v6 businesses that can
drive<BR>innovation and expansion in the Internet industry, as well as
other<BR>industries. Removing the requirement for a single aggregate
announcement<BR>benefits the NRPM itself, as it has been decided by the
community that<BR>it should not contain routing advice.<BR><BR>Timetable for
implementation: immediately upon BoT
ratification<BR><BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>PPML<BR>You
are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<BR>the ARIN Public
Policy Mailing List (<A href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net"
target=_blank>ARIN-PPML@arin.net</A>).<BR>Unsubscribe or manage your mailing
list subscription at:<BR><A
href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml"
target=_blank>http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</A><BR>Please
contact <A href="mailto:info@arin.net" target=_blank>info@arin.net</A> if you
experience any issues.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>