Re: [sig-policy] prop-081: Eligibility for assignments from the final /8

To: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-081: Eligibility for assignments from the final /8
From: Andy Linton <asjl at lpnz dot org>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:38:48 +1300
Cc: Policy SIG <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
In-reply-to: <m24oligijt.wl%randy at psg dot com>
List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <m2y6jdkvda.wl%randy@psg.com> <465081173.26398@cnnic.cn> <465102102.19303@cnnic.cn> <465265258.01293@cnnic.cn> <465274152.27736@cnnic.cn> <465335849.18210@cnnic.cn> <465613312.08668@cnnic.cn> <465780776.01173@cnnic.cn> <466206463.09899@cnnic.cn> <6DD0768F-96D6-405F-A2DA-DEFD90D38DAD@terrym.net> <4B79A791.3070106@lpnz.org> <m24oligijt.wl%randy@psg.com>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1

> < chair hat = off >
> 
>> I'm with Terry and others on this. When we get to the last /8, the world
>> changes. The policy for the last /8 takes effect and APNIC focuses its
>> resources on IPv6 deployment.
> 
> do you literally mean apnic focus on ipv6 deployment?  i thought apnic's
> job was address allocation and operators did deployment.  talk about
> mission creep!  i suspect you did not really mean this.

You suspect absolutely correctly.
> 
> i see apnic's role in ipv6 as two things: education [0], and making ipv6
> address space cheap and easy to get.

100% agree

> 
> this proposal focuses apnic on ipv6 deployment by coercing operators.
> it says apnic should extort operators' business decisions by withholding
> allocation.  this is a very dangerous idea.

And the reason why I'm not persuaded that this policy is a good idea.