[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Draft on Globally Unique IPv6 Local Unicast Addresses



Robert Elz wrote:
> 
>     Date:        Mon, 26 May 2003 16:07:25 +0200
>     From:        Brian E Carpenter <brian@hursley.ibm.com>
>     Message-ID:  <3ED21F9D.BC0A3162@hursley.ibm.com>
> 
>   | > > it. But in fact, if I get my copy of "181:8008:7134" from a registry that
>   | > > promises never to give anyone else a copy of it, then it's easy to decide
>   | > > who wins if I ever encounter a clash with another copy of
>   | > > "181:8008:7134".
> 
> I should have asked this when you first said that, but how?
> 
> You (quite correctly) said "a registry".   If you go spend your 10 Euros
> on the number from one registry, and I go spend my 10 Euros from another
> registry, and they both issue us the same number, who wins, and why?
> 
> How/why is one registry to be preferred over another?   By what legal
> fiction would one organisation's right to sell numbers for money be
> able to be judged better than anothers?

Let's not restart the ICANN wars here over a trivium. Like any other
registry, we make it unique and its authority would come from IANA. 
As Bob's draft says, safeguards are needed to ensure that if it makes
a profit, it would be used for the public good.

> 
> Note that this is quite different from "routable" numbers, where what
> is really being obtained (sold, leased, loaned, whatever) is the right
> to have the number installed in one particular instance of the global
> routing table - with most people preferring the one that everyone else
> is also using (which does nothing to prevent someone else selling the
> same right wrt some other routing table - that's just not likely to get
> very many customers).
> 
> The same is true of domain names, where what is really being "sold" isn't
> the name, but the slot in the DNS zone file.

Well, I think we also have running code to prove that people value
hanging off the unique root, since despite dire predictions we still
seem to have a single namespace.

> But with numbers that are just numbers and no more than that?

What you get for 10 Euros is *only* the assurance that the same
number hasn't been given to anyone else. If you think that isn't
worth paying for, don't use the service (that's why I believe there
should be a non-registry alternative).  

Another way to look at it is (using my example prefix) that IANA
has delegated FC00::/8 to a particular registry, and that
registry has chosen to sell non-aggregatable /48 prefixes
for 10 Euros each. If they stay in business, fine; if they go
bust, that's fine too.

   Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------