[128128] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Conrad)
Sun Jul 25 03:01:53 2010
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <4C4BDCE4.7040009@brightok.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 09:01:33 +0200
To: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jul 25, 2010, at 8:42 AM, Jack Bates wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote:
>> having none of that. (For bonus points, explain how the RIRs continue =
to exist if everyone can have all of the guaranteed-globally-unique IPv6 =
space they wanted for free.)
> whois.
http://whois.iana.org
> what did I win? IANA can handle very basic assignments, but hasn't the =
staff for large support or extra services (whois, POC =
management/validity, routing registry).
With the exception of a routing registry (which I wasn't aware was an =
address allocation requirement), these services are provided by ICANN as =
part of the IANA functions contract. Out of curiosity, why do you think =
providing whois, POC management/validity, and even a routing registry =
requires a large staff?
> I think IANA would be perfect for ULA identifier assignments. No =
whois/poc/routing registry needed. Send email, get an identifier in a =
week or 2.
As you note, ICANN already provides something like this as part of the =
protocol parameter function of the IANA functions contract for private =
enterprise numbers (OIDs).
> This is my concern. A business would rather be assured uniqueness over =
gambling, no matter what the odds.
I remember arguments like that about why Token Ring was going to win =
over Ethernet :-)
> Given no additional services are needed, the administration cost is =
the same as handing out snmp enterprise oids. The fact that the =
community isn't offering such due to politics is disheartening and just =
plain sad.
Indeed. I have stories...=20
Regards,
-drc
(who no longer works for ICANN)
