I-D Action:draft-azinger-scalable-addressing-00.txt

Cameron Byrne cb.list6 at gmail.com
Tue Sep 28 18:35:40 CEST 2010

> How is this better?  Is it really anyone's assumption that I should be forced into a one-upstream solution and that I would find that acceptable?

It's not, and i believe that has been established time and time again.
 There are a basket full of nascent solutions in the pipe (ILNP ...)
that will address some of this, maybe... time will tell.  Today's
addressing architecture, TE, multi-homing, peering and ultimately ISP
BGP policy are all function of economics in this space.  Right?
Internet architecture is not very prescriptive, it has evolved based
on various economic (which includes technology ...) stimuli with a
handful of architectural guidelines.

Right now, the various policy bodies are trying to roll out IPv6
because it is good policy.  Making IPv6 easy is the right thing to do
right now, and that includes PI .... /32s or /48s, it does not matter.
 Having been reject for IPv4 space in 2005, having rolled out BOGONs
to customer in 2008, .... i know that IPv4 is hurt and is not a good
place for growing services to be (mobile).

The problem statement is that lots PI is not great in the long run
because it is expensive in the DFZ.  Instead of having the DFZ
providers absorb the cost of ever growing RIB, the RIR should make PI
uncomfortable for people that don't really need it that bad.  Perhaps
have a fee schedule that ramps up over time?  Cheap now, and
increasingly expensive over time?  Make it simple, but increasingly
painful, and predictable.  Nobody likes surprises.

If not, the DFZ will grow, and the DFZ providers will pass the cost on
to the end sites yet again.  Nobody rides for free, and no the
internet will not break.  I believe the consensus is that providing
negative incentives to PI early is good, but we need to be gentle now
as deployment of IPv6 ramps up.  Lets keep in mind it is all about
business, the stakeholders that control the money (probably not on
this list) are not motivated to do the right thing for the DFZ.  That
said, make the DFZ issue a small business issue for the end sites
before it is a large business issue for the DFZ providers..  Today, i
believe the RIRs are in a good place to do that.  Moreover, it is best
for the RIR to decide how to do that.


More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list