Michel, Michel Py wrote:
I think that the split space is better, for the following reason: truly unique is a paid feature. People that pay for the feature will want a guarantee that they will get what they paid for, which is truly unique, which means the only model that works is split space.
Michel Py wrote:
Since truly unique would have a fee, the people that pay the fee will finance the development effort. From an enterprise standpoint, $50 a year is not significant if it buys the *guarantee* that the address is unique. The truly unique feature is like insurance.
Let me try to understand why exactly some people would be willing to pay a fee for "truly" uniqueness. I'm probably missing some issues here; your input is valued.
First of all, there is no such thing as an absolute guarantee for global uniqueness. Misconfigurations happen. Thus, the real difference between the "split space" and "mixed space" model is that in the split space model, *nobody* is *supposed* to configure or use a registered prefix, while in the mixed space model someone *may* legitimitely use it. However, even in the mixed space model the party having preformed the registration has some kind of ownership/moral property rights over the prefix, giving them more rights over those that haven't registered the prefix but happen to be using it anyway. Thus, whatever you pay, you don't have any absolute guarantee that nobody else is using your prefix. What you have is some kind of right over the prefix, the right having been aquired by registering and paying. Now, the case seems to depend on psychology and the formulation of rights. In the split space case the rights are easier to formulate, more natural, and stronger in that sense. Nobody is supposed to use your prefix, and therefore they are wrong if they use your prefix, and you can sue them (or, in Europe, you can dispise and ignore them :-) As far as I understand, it would be possible to come fairly close to that even in the mixed space model. If you have registered a prefix, nobody else can register the same prefix, and if you ever see someone using you prefix, they are wrong by letting the prefix to leak, and you can sue them (or at least dispise and ignore them :-) So, to me, it looks like the only thing "truly" uniqueness buys is that if your prefix is ever leaked by someone else but you, you may have better chances to shut them down, since you can morally require them to change their prefix. The cost of tracking down the party leaking the prefix seems to be the same. In both cases registration buys you the assurance that you do not need to renumber you prefix, ever. --Pekka Nikander -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
