[address-policy-wg] RE: IPv6 allocations for 6RD
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: IPv6 allocations for 6RD
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: IPv6 allocations for 6RD
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Marco Hogewoning
marcoh at marcoh.net
Wed Dec 2 09:05:43 CET 2009
On 1 dec 2009, at 23:02, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > >> 3.5. Conservation and Administrative Ease >> Although IPv6 provides an extremely large pool of address space, >> historical evidence shows that what now seems infinit might one day >> turn out to become a scarce resource, Address policies should avoid >> unnecessarily wasteful practices of such resources. Requests for >> address space should be supported by appropriate documentation and >> stockpiling of unused addresses should be avoided. Assignment of >> address space based on the sole argument of administrative >> ease is not permitted. Examples of this include, but are not limited >> to, ease of billing administration and network management. > > I strongly agree with the concern that v6 addresses could be > depleted quickly. > > This problem will never be solved appropriately until you impose > fees for addresses that increase with the size of the block being > requested. What you seem to be learning, the hard way, is that > charging nothing for addresses requires you to ration the address > space using highly subjective and purely verbal, unquantifiable > criteria. Such as, the term "unnecessarily wasteful" which manages > to be both tautological and unprecise. Or the term "administrative > ease"; ok, after that becomes a policy no one will admit that they > are requesting addresses for administrative ease but will that > actually alter their request? > > Appropriately graduated annual fees enforce conservation AND > reclamation while relieving the allocator of engaging in these > verbal and categorical games Hi Milton, There is already a coupling between charging and allocation size: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/charging2010.html It might not be enough, but then again if we run out policies will be modified eventually like it happend with v4...from /8 to /21 initial in just 30 years. MarcoH
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: IPv6 allocations for 6RD
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: IPv6 allocations for 6RD
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]