Re: For whom is IPv6? [was: Happy St Nicholas Day: Re-Launching the IPv6 ULA registry]

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 14 December 2020 04:46 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBD693A0E9B for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 20:46:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.197
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP=0.001, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XYS0_GWwiIrX for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 20:46:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg1-x541.google.com (mail-pg1-x541.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::541]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9B693A0E99 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 20:46:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg1-x541.google.com with SMTP id v29so11633905pgk.12 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 20:46:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lrg/IiAJmp56dlMFn2pxxFq1AhTJ9m0Ak2Z4EUN9r3c=; b=ljVpO/MhQYYlya7FUw6YNLInLiZD1yQ6dFR0c3FXI0WzTnYPbvUVJx2ByOQKa60uWl fl2pE+q4Q66nBlbp1LZifmbIDoT2jH0slIsBn7W6N9+8D8mRdyaA7Rfl3vV6kmNrW8z+ C5CoPfZ2q9t1VXQBnY10aPsTVjHgXGtJt9XUp7HQA/bnu9DYEBnVdRTlpkPmeaz4l3wX odPwejYRfryOUoy0fD79iiLPDvbaB8MzK11cia6/fEckuFkoxJV+ff9QSzzwvuqSsMiM 82AZEijkI2eGhftTRXoOr4AKI38v3S+28b2bTQG3QIjEGvJnuorLyv4xU+6vYI8nfTqo rC+w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=lrg/IiAJmp56dlMFn2pxxFq1AhTJ9m0Ak2Z4EUN9r3c=; b=eobceYhMfkcP+HCe2vTi8AUJWgfMT9hv0sYQzySFfDWaKOWz0ddH8Wf/qntaV82ZSj 9VcCyue8KFpcprjdP4hhFw8snjw+i5j9e1BB/Hf4HB+u0Q9ibxtdEvgfrj2fmmtNwn/7 59QqjUxXMTb8dmGUrGiMpLvWBj27dk9SH4+a5dR3Jgr7nB/RMSYda7kLI3d+GSmP3kX7 1tug6ECUg8w+V2N3oVHlSzoMe9l4kIBuC4b3QAQrOCkKKwZM/1zNJgOn/0gn6+HyA6Mf kkUNvJSmhlqO/f6Ea0l1oKsjGu1a1s9SCpMgRnZFybSvHMKYSV1J0gCEmb7JTzWdyfBA zBeg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532N63M3xqdRzwnf4f55ELeQOjv/som0eNCKOCSVwYceLl1KQ9iC gXVh9BtvUJLnHVS2av6YoMgUTlnuJWQpZg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzftgsMGBshSLm56xsr3EDNJIwtnAqOuDK5dXBrlF+Y4/XLW+Oq7mWgGlzEUcySTcXi/hVLvA==
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:8a88:0:b029:19d:8f05:b7a6 with SMTP id a8-20020aa78a880000b029019d8f05b7a6mr22120583pfc.39.1607921186031; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 20:46:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.20.15.112] ([202.134.35.146]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w2sm16950857pjb.22.2020.12.13.20.46.23 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 13 Dec 2020 20:46:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: For whom is IPv6? [was: Happy St Nicholas Day: Re-Launching the IPv6 ULA registry]
To: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>
Cc: IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
References: <87r1o3deni.fsf@ungleich.ch> <CAKD1Yr3ptRjewThToEgERUOKwehTwdqNUAq14acc_nHLFqf3bg@mail.gmail.com> <87im9ds0z9.fsf@ungleich.ch> <fc637d64-a763-e5cf-fb93-002babe5f9ae@foobar.org> <87v9dcr37w.fsf@ungleich.ch> <CA+9kkMCb9fJQFJaP5ZaiwkQ2nRS7Fsn+q=C5OCPqdmMZRLSBKg@mail.gmail.com> <87sg8fp8ez.fsf@ungleich.ch> <47d1fbd9-8979-91af-240f-ec8c86f15e8d@gmail.com> <87h7ouoww4.fsf@ungleich.ch> <CAN-Dau06FTQr_c8C=cqgFGuPZ-KN2pbT-RmTHTEOkMZF0QWmNQ@mail.gmail.com> <b63e0c58-8e70-9c83-3f6e-6a503c20d974@gmail.com> <6983.1607632594@localhost> <b3bf02a6-f204-f392-dcb6-583d5558951f@gmail.com> <4400.1607898125@localhost> <efa62201-b1b5-0bf4-3264-6be9325c948b@gmail.com> <CAN-Dau1ooFykmv=S26wkNHLWq+tRKwzQDXEvuBRnGXA_j4gYMw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9f7ee7db-7df1-5ff7-9ddf-d5fb123e7ca4@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 17:46:20 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAN-Dau1ooFykmv=S26wkNHLWq+tRKwzQDXEvuBRnGXA_j4gYMw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/8LJRCKOS6RuswKbwLOtxpuSG7is>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 04:46:31 -0000

On 14-Dec-20 16:13, David Farmer wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 18:20 Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com <mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Let's stipulate that this is true:
> 
>     > This is a case where a ULA-C allocation per-customer would make sense, if
>     > it could be done for a non-recurring fee.
> 
>     I see a challenge there. As sixxs and other examples have showed us, a
>     pro bono service will not live for ever. How can a ULA-C registry, even a
>     strictly non-profit one, live for ever if there is no annual fee?
> 
> 
> Not to mention that an annual fee and termination for the lack of payment is an extremely efficient mechanism for maintaining the accuracy of the registry over long periods of time.  Without it or a similar periodic mechanism for garbage collection, information in the registry will rot over time and we will just rebuild the swamp.  

But does that matter? The only property requested is uniqueness. These prefixes would never be in the mythical DFZ anyway, unless I've greatly misunderstood the use case.

    Brian

> Furthermore, making that mechanism an annual fee nicely aligns with the need to fund the registry. 
> 
> So, if there isn’t an annual fee, not only do you need a different funding mechanism but a different garbage collection mechanism too. While not impossible, this seems like a very tall order to me. 
> 
> Thanks
> 
>     Regards
>        Brian
> 
>     On 14-Dec-20 11:22, Michael Richardson wrote:
>     >
>     > Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com <mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>> wrote:
>     >     > Right, that's an entirely different situation and I hope it will be a
>     >     > frequent one. We have several /3s spare. Should we dedicate a /3 to
>     >     > that class of usage, and figure out (with IANA and the RIRs) how to
>     >     > make such prefixes available for admin cost only, or even self-service
>     >     > free of charge along the lines Nico suggested?
>     >
>     >     > (Because I'm thinking that for the full power of such mesh networking
>     >     > to be available, ULA-C would not be enough.)
>     >
>     > Gosh, that would really be a good problem to have, wouldn't it?
>     > That's 2^40  /48s, right?
>     > 1,099,511,627,776, approximately 100 /48s per human.
>     >
>     > I don't think we need to dedicate a /3 to this problem.
>     > It would, as David Farmer said, be dumb to replicate the
>     > RIPE/ARIN/etc. databases and whois systems, and the like just for this.
>     > David points out that Community Network allocation (a /40) is available
>     > for $250/year from ARIN.
>     >
>     > That's still a bit painful and the definition is a bit unclear.
>     >
>     > here is an industrial/IT case that I know of:
>     > The backplane of an IXIA testing chassis uses IPv4, 11.0.0.0/8 <http://11.0.0.0/8>.
>     > It could use ULA, but:
>     > a) it sometimes leaks packets and confuses people, especially IT.
>     >    (They need whois to diagnose what is happening.
>     >    11.0.0.0/8 <http://11.0.0.0/8> also confuses them.... WTF is DNIC doing inside our firewall?)
>     > b) sometimes you want to link the chassis together across labs or even VPNs.
>     >
>     > This is a case where a ULA-C allocation per-customer would make sense, if
>     > it could be done for a non-recurring fee.
>     >
>     > --
>     > Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca <mailto:mcr%2BIETF@sandelman.ca>>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
>     >            Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
> 
>     --------------------------------------------------------------------
>     IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>     ipv6@ietf.org <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
>     Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>     --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> -- 
> ===============================================
> David Farmer               Email:farmer@umn.edu <mailto:Email%3Afarmer@umn.edu>
> Networking & Telecommunication Services
> Office of Information Technology
> University of Minnesota  
> 2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
> ===============================================