ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

Cian Brennan cian.brennan at
Fri Apr 9 06:27:20 CDT 2010

On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 06:09:19AM -0500, Joe Greco wrote:
> > > 1) Justify why we need a heavy bureaucracy such as ARIN for IPv6
> > >   numbering resources,
> > 
> > Because the members of ARIN (and the other four RIRs) want it that way.
> > And because nobody has yet made a serious proposal to ICANN that
> > would replace ARIN.
> Using the organization to justify the need for the organization is
> circular reasoning.
> > > 2) Tell me why something like the old pre-depletion pre-ARIN model
> > >   of InterNIC and just handing out prefixes with substantially less
> > >   paper-pushing wouldn't result in a cheaper-to-run RIR.
> > 
> > Because the ARIN members, who pay most of ARIN's fees, are not
> > complaining about the level of those fees. This means that they
> > think the fees are cheap enough, or else they would demand that
> > the fees be changed. All ARIN fees are set by the ARIN members.
> Again, ...
> Anyways, the non-answers to these questions are very illuminating.
This is an answer though. The vast majority of people who need address space in
North America are ARIN members. These ARIN members are happy with the current
organisation. If the set of people who need IP address tend towards being happy
with the current system, there is no reason to change it for a new system,
which they may not be happy with.

> ... JG
> -- 
> Joe Greco - Network Services - Milwaukee, WI -
> "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.



More information about the NANOG mailing list