[ppml] [address-policy-wg] Re: article about IPv6 vs firewalls vs NAT in arstechnica (seen on slashdot)
Iljitsch van Beijnum iljitsch at muada.com
Tue May 22 10:45:12 CEST 2007
[Funny those multi-mailinglist threads - I never know in which mailbox they'll congregate!] On 15-mei-2007, at 0:47, Owen DeLong wrote: >>> If the qualifications for ULA-C were the same, or, if ULA-C was >>> only available to orgs. that had PI, I think that would be >>> acceptable. >> I can't really understand the reasoning behind that. What are you >> trying to achieve, why do you want to restrict handing out ULA-C to >> only a specific (small) subset of folks out there? > I don't want to give ULA-C to people who have an incentive to abuse > it as PI. Don't forget that address space is only useful if it's (almost) universally accepted. This is almost certainly not going to be the case for any type of ULA. Apart from that, I would argue that if you want to make sure that ULAs can't be used as PI, it's beneficial to make sure that there are as many of those block out there as possible, so that the prospect of carrying even a subset of those becomes inpractical. And in my opinion, there is no reason to involve the RIRs in giving out ULA-c space, as there are no requirements that must be checked. Just make sure the price is high enough that people aren't going to use up excessively large amounts and any domain registry/registrar should be able to give those out. Something like 5 euros per year should make sure people won't register millions of them without creating a barrier for those who need ULA space and prefer the centrally assigned kind. >> ULA-C becomes PI the moment folks will accept it in their routing >> table >> (and if that is a serious risk, ULA-L could as easily become PI >> the same >> way). But why should routing folks do that? > Hopefully routing folks won't, but, in my experience, $$$ can lead > routing > folks to ignore what should or shouldn't be done from an internet > context > and, instead, focus on what makes money. If you can get 5% of the internet population to boycott routable ULAs that makes them unusable as such so this won't be a problem.