[6bone] proposal for transfer of 6bone address management responsibilities to RIRs

[Francis Dupont]

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   > => one of the interest of IPv6 is to finish with this system of fees for
   > addresses. I am afraid that the current RIR monopoly will give at the end
   > something even nastier than ICANN.
   
   How do you propose to handle address management, reverse DNS management
   etc. without someone to take care of it (and get paid for it)?
   
=> I didn't say I have the "solution" but the Internet was here for enough
time to show what things are not good solutions. And the current system,
the RIR monopoly, can only give a disaster in the long term, and something
even worse than ICANN because the IPv4 address space is really limited.
 Unfortunately it seems that only this system is proposed for IPv6 and
we already got some bad consequences: can you really argue that RIRs pushed
for IPv6 last years?
 To come back to the 6bone (and to stay in the list charter), the case
of inviduals and sites interested in IPv6 (/64, /48, ...) is handled by
small organizations without money or resources to collect money (this is
a key point, I'll come back to it), not by ISPs (i.e., RIR members) because
the number of ISPs supporting IPv6 is too small. The proposed transfer will
remove the 6bone choice to these organizations and their "clients" and
throw everybody to worse solutions like 6to4 (worse because the 6to4-relay
issue is far to be solved).
 About collecting small fees: this is something very hard and very expensive.
Only a large organization can easily collect small fees and in general these
fees are at 99% used to keep the organization running. Just ask if RIRs
are ready to run pTLAs in the framework of Bob's proposal (if current
small organizations stop running them, we'll need to transfer this too
to someone).

Regards

Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr
(SIGCOMM'02 laptop bar is closing, I'll continue after)