[address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"

Hi David,

Fully agree with your comments.

Why we don't try to open the eyes on those points in the different RIRs policy WGs ?

Actually I'm even starting to doubt about the effectiveness of having different RIRs. It will not be simple to have a single entity, with different local offices, with localized training plans, etc., but single global policy ? I know this is "politically" difficult and even can be perceived as incorrect by some members but ... seems to me much more practical.

One suggestion I made several times is that instead of having 3 regional meetings per year, we should have less regional meetings and 1 Global RIRs (all the members) meeting. This meeting can move each year to a different region and I'm sure will be very good to actually help to build a global policy.

Regards,
Jordi

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Kessens" <david.kessens at nokia.com>
To: "JORDI PALET MARTINEZ" <jordi.palet at consulintel.es>
Cc: <address-policy-wg at ripe.net>
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 3:30 AM
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"


> 
> Jordi,
> 
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 12:40:39AM +0200, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
> > 
> > I'm very interested to heard about what "interesting problems" do
> > you think the lack of a global policy will create.
> > 
> > May be having those problems openly discussed could provide the
> > required propeller in order to ensure a global coordination again.
> 
> IP (both versions) address space is a global resource. It would be
> unfair for people operating in different regions if they would get
> addresses based on different rulesets, or worse are unable to get
> addresses in one region while they would be eligible in another. In
> addition, multinational companies are able to do address shopping in
> different regions (where it is easiest/cheapest), while local
> companies have to deal with the local monopoly that has more difficult
> rules than another region or has temporary service issues.
> 
> [On a side note: The boundaries of the regions are completely
>  artificial and irrelevant in a network that knows no borders. Why is
>  it that we have to get our resources from areas on the globe that are
>  rather expensive in an age when many companies are starting to move
>  service industry jobs to places where it is more cost effective ?]
> 
> In addition, a climate has been created where we are doing 'competive
> liberalization' of our rules, if one region changes the rules, others
> feel they have to follow, even though very often no research has been
> done on what actually the need for the policy change was, the
> consequences for the global routing table and whether other
> alternative solutions were possible that are cheaper in execution or
> more fair.
> 
> And this is only a subset of all the issues, use your imagination and
> you will come up with your own set. 
> 
> David Kessens
> ---
> 
> 


**********************************
Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit
Presentations and videos on line at:
http://www.ipv6-es.com

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.