Subject: RE: [[email-masked]: PI addressing in IPv6 advances in ARIN]

From: "Michel Py" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:57:25 -0700

>> Michel Py wrote:
>> My $0.02 about geo PI: a strategy change is needed. Instead of
>> presenting geo PI as the solution that would give PI without
>> impacting the routing table (this will not fly because there are
>> too few believers and too many unknowns), present it as the icing
>> on the cake of a comprehensive non-geo PI proposal.

> Scott Leibrand wrote:
> That's exactly what I'm pushing for.  I'm in the process of
> brainstorming with other interested parties (and potential
> co-authors) to put together an ARIN public policy proposal that
> directs ARIN to assign PI netblocks in a regular fashion instead
> of the current random (chronological) fashion used for IPv4. As I
> stated above, I don't think aggregating is necessary or wise just
> yet, but I think that setting things up now, to make it possible
> to do so later if needed, is wise and prudent, and can be done
> with little or no additional complexity (cost).

Feel free to re-use this:
http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/ipv6mh/geov6.txt
Which is by no means the only way to go.

That being said,

> Noel Chiappa wrote:
> There's a certain deep irony here, because PI-addresses have been
> considered at length in the IETF in at least two different WG's
> - CIDR-D and Multi-6. Both rejected them after extensive discussion.
> Nevertheless, a policy-making body has seen fit to ignore that, and
> make an engineering decision to deploy PI-space. It's hard to read
> that decision any other way than to have it imply that the decisions
> in those WG's were technically uninformed.

Noel has a point here. This certainly will be percept as ARIN handling
matters that belong to the IETF. It does not mean that the IETF was
right, though.

<<<< breaking news>>>>
The ARIN Advisory Council (AC), acting under the provisions of the
ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process (IRPEP), has reviewed
policy proposal 2005-8: Proposal to amend ARIN IPv6 assignment and
utilisation requirement  and has determined that there is community
consensus in favor of the proposal to move it to last call. The AC made
this determination at their meeting at the conclusion of the ARIN Public
Policy meeting on April 11, 2006. The results of the AC meeting were
reported by the Chair of the AC at the member meeting. This report can
be found at http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/ARIN_XVII/mem.html

Michel.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf