nanog mailing list archives
Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space
From: Joe Greco <jgreco () ns sol net>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:26:51 -0500 (CDT)
-----Original Message----- From: Joe Greco [mailto:jgreco () ns sol net] It seems like you could run an RIR more cheaply by simply handing out the space fairly liberally, which would have the added benefit of encouraging v6 adoption. The lack of a need for onerous contractual clauses as suggested above, combined with less overhead costs, ought to make v6 really cheap.For "fairly liberally" see: For ISPs: https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six51 You have to be an ISP with a plan to have 200 assignment in 5 years Non-ISP: https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six58 Be not-an-ISP and have a need for addresses (per other policies, you get to choose which one). In another post you asked essentially "why does ARIN charge so much?" ARIN doesn't just maintain a notebook of address assignments. There are HA servers for Whois,
Yeah, real expensive...
IN-ADDR. and IP6.ARPA,
Ditto...
research in things like SIDR, DNSsec, other tools-services, and educational outreach on IPv6.
None of which a RIR really /needs/ to do, of course.
You suggest that there's much less to argue about in IPv6 policy,
No, I argue there *could* be much less to argue about in IPv6 policy.
but if you look at current proposals (https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/) you'll see three that are IPv6-specific, and most of the others cover both IPv4 and IPv6. So ARIN will continue to maintain the mailing lists, and hold public policy meetings (with remote participation, so anyone can participate), and facilitate elections so you can throw the bums out if you don't like how we do things.
None of which really addresses the point I made; that's the sound of a bureaucracy perpetuating itself.
We don't really know how much IPv6 will cost ARIN. If there were no more debate about allocation policies, and nobody else had any interest in us (politically or litigiously), and technology were fairly static, then we might just do periodic tech refreshes and be fine. I imagine all of those things will continue for a while, though, and ARIN will need to be financially solvent through the transition.
The point I was making is that after the "transition", the justification for ARIN is one of maintaining the status quo and perpetuating itself. My question was, what purpose is served by that? With IPv6 designed the way it is, is there a realistic chance of running out of IPv6 even if some questionable delegations are made? What's the purpose of having the complex legal agreements? Handing out numbers without much fuss worked okay in the early days of IPv4, before it became clear that there would be eventual depletion. IPv6 was designed to avoid the depletion scenario, and with that in mind, is there a good reason that a much smaller RIRv6 model wouldn't work? ... JG -- Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net "We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN) With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.
Current thread:
- Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space, (continued)
- Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space Gordon Cook (Apr 12)
- Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space Seth Mattinen (Apr 12)
- Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space William Herrin (Apr 08)
- RE: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space David Hubbard (Apr 08)
- Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space N. Yaakov Ziskind (Apr 08)
- Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space Joe Greco (Apr 08)
- RE: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space Lee Howard (Apr 08)
- RE: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space Mr. James W. Laferriere (Apr 08)
- Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space Owen DeLong (Apr 08)
- Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space Stephen Sprunk (Apr 08)
- Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space Joe Greco (Apr 08)
- Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space William Herrin (Apr 08)
- "Running out of IPv6" (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space) Jeroen Massar (Apr 08)
- Re: "Running out of IPv6" (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space) Chris Grundemann (Apr 08)
- Re: "Running out of IPv6" (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space) Owen DeLong (Apr 08)
- Re: "Running out of IPv6" (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacyIP4 Space) John Palmer (NANOG Acct) (Apr 08)
- Re: "Running out of IPv6" (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacyIP4 Space) Michael Dillon (Apr 08)
- Re: "Running out of IPv6" (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacyIP4 Space) Owen DeLong (Apr 08)
- Re: "Running out of IPv6" (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacyIP4 Space) William Herrin (Apr 08)
- Re: "Running out of IPv6" (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacyIP4 Space) Michael Dillon (Apr 09)
- Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space N. Yaakov Ziskind (Apr 08)
- Re: "Running out of IPv6" (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space) David Conrad (Apr 08)