[lir-wg] ICANN Reform

On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:

> >  o things such as golden v6 allocations for anything 'important'
> >    were discussed in a wg, voted (with almost no representation by
> >    folk who run routers, i.e. will pay the costs), and done with
> >    long laundry lists of ideas for who might deserve golden
> >    prefixes, and all were approved.  it was a childish land grab.
> 
> 
> Sorry I am not aware of the issue. What worries me is that I cannot
> find a reference to what you talk about in the minutes of either
> the IPv6 DB or this WG. This is bad. Can you point me there?
> 

I don't think Randy is referring to the RIPE region.

In that region, I do know, however, that the discussion, which I seem to
remember took place in the IPv6 wg and the LIR wg mailing lists, is
difficult to follow because of the way the indexes are threaded. Someone 
had some comments about not being able to follow the discussion if they 
just clicked in the URL mentioned in the minutes.

This is however only a technical glitch and the information is most
certainly there and accesible to all. It may have even been corrected by 
now. So give it another try.

> Maybe the lack of stable discussion here is a result of the perceived
> lack of currnet operational importance of IPv6. In other words: 
> Noone really cares (yet). This creates room for all sorts of
> ideas and little checks and balances.
> 

Possibly, though I have the feeling interest in IPv6 is growing rapidly.

Joao