Subject: RE: globally unique site local addresses

From: "Michel Py" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 07:58:10 -0800

Charlie,

> Charlie Perkins wrote:
> I don't think a fee is required at all.  The amount of
> storage and processor time that a freebie allocation site
> would require is so small, I'm sure many people,
> including me, would be willing to host such a website for
> free.  I suggested before that there should be a web page
> under www.iana.org for people to get addresses, rate limited
> and so on.  This is not a "registration", because nobody has
> to care about who actually got the address, and no services
> are to be offered.
> This would solve the uniqueness problem, but all the other
> problems would remain.  It seems to me that this also eliminates
> a requirement for "statistically unique" addresses for site-local.

If the addresses were allocated randomly or with a hash I would agree
with you. However, what I proposed was addresses allocated
geographically, along the lines of being used as identifiers for a
dual-space multihoming solution, and this will require some work from
the RIRs (maintenance/monitoring of areas) thus the fee.

Michel.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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 [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Charles E. Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 08:57:53 -0800

Hello Michel,

Michel Py wrote:

>> Charlie Perkins wrote:
>> I don't think a fee is required at all. 
              ......
> the RIRs (maintenance/monitoring of areas) thus the fee.

My proposal is that we allocated them linearly -- starting at
1,000,000 or so and incrementing by one after each allocation.
That's easy and effective.  If you want something more structured,
then that's solving a different problem and should be considered
separately.  One problem at a time, please!

Whatever the freebie allocation algorithm is, it has to be
simple enough to be free.   If it costs even $0.01, then that
means paperwork for the consumer probably including even
an invoice and managerial approval.

Regards,
Charlie P.

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 13:05:09 -0500

> the RIRs (maintenance/monitoring of areas) thus the fee.

one interesting characteristic of geographic addresses is that if 
nearby parties pick the same prefixes due to a lack of precision, 
it should be easy for them to find one another - just start knocking 
on nearby doors :)

Keith