[address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] Revising Centrally Assigned ULA draft

On Jun 15, 2007, at 8:14 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:

> If you doubt about folks stating anything, then you should read  
> *before*
> minutes of meetings. I'm now off-line in a plane, so can't point  
> you to a
> specific URL, but this has been said at least in one ARIN meeting.
>
> It has been clear across all this discussion in several exploders,  
> that
> there are both opinions, people that want ULA-C and people that  
> don't. What
> you need to be smart here is to realize that those than don't want  
> ULA-C
> have no any objective reason to oppose to it, because implementing  
> ULA-C has
> no negative impact in others. While opposing to it has negative  
> impact to
> all: Folks will use global space (PA or PI) for doing the function  
> of ULA-C
> an this is a waste, yes a small waste but a waste.
>
Jordi,
	You have this backwards.  Using PI for the purposes of ULA-C is no  
waste
at all.  Sectioning off a huge chunk of address space for ULA-C is  
the waste.
If it's all PI, then, it can seamlessly move between being unrouted  
or routed as
the address-holder sees fit and as needs change.  If it is set aside  
as ULA, then,
the address space is forever wasted and cannot (theoretically) be  
used as
routable space, no matter how little of it is needed for ULA-C.

	Those of us who oppose ULA-C have what we believe to be an objective
position that it provides no additional benefit over PI space while  
simultaneously
creating some unnecessary classification of addresses that makes  
their status
in the routing table ill-defined at best.  In our opinion, this  
carries the potential
for significant consequences globally.

	Just because we do not agree with you does not mean that our concerns
are not legitimate.

	Do I think UUNET and others should be able to get secondary  
microallocations
to solve the problem they presented? Absolutely.  Do I think that we  
need to set
aside a /8, /12, /16, or whatever separate from the rest of PI space  
to do it? No.
We should just issue them a /48 or whatever it is they need from the  
general
pool of available PI space and be done with it.  No waste at all.  No  
negative
consequences to anyone.  No ambiguous status as to where you can or  
can't
route the addresses, etc.

Owen