[address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] [GLOBAL-V6] Re: Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it less destructive

Thus spake "Pekka Savola" <pekkas at netcore.fi>
> On Fri, 21 Apr 2006, Daniel Roesen wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 11:44:42PM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote:
>>> Remember, it's easy and cheap to have a multihoming setup with
>>> two DSL lines...

ARIN has replied to me privately that two IPv6 tunnels over the same 
physical link count as "multihoming"; another PPML poster has told me 
privately he's actually gotten an ASN that way.

IMHO this needs to be corrected, but it doesn't appear to be abused except 
out of novelty, so it's not a dire emergency.

>> Could you finally make up your mind? First, your argument was that
>> multihoming is expensive anyway, so shelling out another couple
>> thousand of EUR/USD/whatever doesn't make a difference - just to
>> keep the clueless bottom-feeders out. Now you say it's totally
>> cheap to multihome.
>>
>> You're contradicting yourself.
>
> You took the comments out of context.  The former describes that
> _real_ multihoming is expensive, the latter describes that you could
> obtain "multihoming" very easily.  The point is that we definitely
> shouldn't want to assign PI to the organizations in the latter
> category.

My reading of the proposal is that it would allow anyone who is multihomed 
to get a PIv6 /48 if they can demonstrate the ability to utilize 256 
addresses immediately and 512 addresses within one year, or 1024 and 2048 
addresses, respectively, if not multihomed.

The address counts appear to be reasonable at first blush.  They're high 
enough to stop residential and SOHO users, but low enough for nearly any 
shop with BGP clue to get a block.  Do remember that only a few hundred 
direct assignments have been made under the PIv4 policy, so apparently it's 
not _too_ low or we'd have seen a land rush already.

As far as fees, if the org already has IPv4 space of some sort, the PIv6 
assignment will presumably be free through 31 Dec 07 like PAv6 assignments 
and USD1250/yr after that.  The idea of charging thousands of dollars more 
to discourage PIv6 applications is not in line with existing fee schedules 
and rather pointless since folks can apparently claim to be LIRs without 
much difficulty and pay USD2250/yr for a /32.

S

Stephen Sprunk        "Stupid people surround themselves with smart
CCIE #3723           people.  Smart people surround themselves with
K5SSS         smart people who disagree with them."  --Aaron Sorkin