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

[David Farmer <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 18:20 Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>
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.  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 <[e-mail]> 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.
> > 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 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 <[e-mail]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT
> consulting )
> >            Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [e-mail]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:[e-mail]
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: [phone]
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================