Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course

Sun Jul 25 06:10:52 UTC 2010

On Jul 24, 2010, at 10:35 PM, Doug Barton wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Jul 2010, Brandon Butterworth wrote:
> 
>>>> Eventually ARIN (or someone else will do it for them) may create a site
>> ...
>>> Did you mean something like this maybe ?:
>>> 
>>> http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/ula/
>> 
>> Q.E.D.
>> 
>> The RFC seeks to avoid a registry so we end up with the potential for
>> many as a result. May as well have had ARIN do it officially in the
>> first place so there'd only be one.
> 
> So, back when ULA was first proposed, some of us said (sometimes privately) that there are only 2 rational options:
> 1. Do it; with a persistent, guaranteed unique, global registry.
> 2. Don't do it.
> 
> Option 2 was a non-starter since there was too much critical mass. The logical candidate to operate option 1 was the IANA, and the RIRs were having none of that. (For bonus points, explain how the RIRs continue to exist if everyone can have all of the guaranteed-globally-unique IPv6 space they wanted for free.)
> 
For bonus points, explain how the numbers side of IANA pays for anything when the RIRs stop funding it?

> So given the overwhelming force pulling at this thing from both directions, you end up somewhere in the middle where no one wants to be.
> 
> And BTW, the lottery is actually the perfect analogy for ULA, since no matter how astronomical the odds against, eventually someone always wins.
> 
Except in the case of ULA, hitting the jackpot is actually losing.

Owen