[ipv6-wg] Free GUA space for community projects [CfP/RFC] (was: Minutes from the IPv6 WG @ RIPE 83)

>> The status quo is:
>>
>> - Community projects use ULA, because it's easy and free  <---------------------------------|
>> - ULA does not have an official registry (and seems to be unlikely that we go there)        |
>> - GUA might be an easy way out of this                                                      |
>> - However GUA costs real money -------------------------------------------------------------|
>> </claim>
>
> ULA does not have a registry because it is highly improbable that
> there will be prefix clashes because the available space is so vast.

... if generated truly randomly and people would not tend towards using
"feed", "f00d", "cafe" or other words [0] in their IPv6 networks, yes.
However even if you check the original sixxs registry or our import
of it or if you check the DN42 registry, both contain "not so random
values".

> That is why it can be free and users can feel comfortable that their
> prefix is unique.

I think the reality is somewhat different, as users "want to be sure"
and thus registries are requested, born and filled - for ULA. Whether or
not the actually collision probability is higher or lower than the
chance of everyone adding to a registry, which is a different risk to
calculate.

>> And the motivation is to reach:
>>
>> - Community projects can use GUA for free <--|
>>   \------------------------------------------|
>>
>> Does it make sense?
>
> You suggest that the users should get registration and DNS for free
> but someone else should pay for it.

Yes and no:

- registration: yes
- dns, connectivity, routing, associated services: not for free

I think the former is mostly a case of "support", while the latter
causes real costs and thus costs need to be forwarded.

> Who should pay and why would they do so?

For the who: individuals and organisations who think that everyone
should have access to GUA.

> And why would this commitment to fund a registry over multiple
> decades be considered reliable enough that the users who pay nothing
> should put their trust in it?

That is a very good question and the only correct answer I have at the
moment is: time has to tell.

Thanks a lot for your input, much appreciated.

Best regards,

Nico

[0] https://redmine.ungleich.ch/projects/ipv6/wiki/IPv6_words_-_name_your_networks

--
Sustainable and modern Infrastructures by ungleich.ch