Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

[Joe Maimon <jmaimon () ttec com>]

Lee Howard wrote:

> I don¹t see anybody hindering any efforts; I don¹t see any efforts.

There were efforts in the past. I am highlighting our malfeasance as a 
community in our past behavior. I have little hope of it changing in the 
future, but I can vent about it every couple years or so.

You take the un-initiated and explain to them the actual utilization 
percentage of the bitspace and then you explain why they should trust us 
with bitspace management the second time around.

> So, you would like to update RFC 1112, which defines and reserves Class E?
> That¹s easy enough. If somebody had a use in mind for the space, anybody
> can write such a draft assigning space, which is, I believe, how to
> direct IANA to do something with it.

nope

http://packetlife.net/blog/2010/oct/14/ipv4-exhaustion-what-about-class-e-addresses/

All the same rationals, including how it might be bad for ipv6, its too 
late, its too hard, its too little were trotted out then, just as now.

The only use I have in mind for the space is for it to cease being 
classified as experimental and therefore treated as invalid.

> If you want to direct IANA to distribute Class E space among the RIRs,
> there¹s more process, because you would also have to develop a global
> policy (no problem, we get the NRO NC to write it and get consensus at
> all the RIRs), and then each RIR would need to develop a policy under
> which to allocate it. I¹d be surprised if all that could happen in
> less than three years.

I would not care about that, so long as the impediment, the experimental 
status was removed. Let the stakeholders have a real shot.

> In any of these processes, nothing will move forward until there is
> consensus, and I don¹t think there¹s consensus. If you think your
> argument can be persuasive, let¹s write an internet-draft and get it
> into the process.
>
> Lee
>
> > Joe