Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course
owen at delong.com
Sun Jul 25 01:10:52 CDT 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 ?:
>> 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.
More information about the NANOG