On Jul 24, 2010, at 10:35 PM, Doug Barton wrote: > On Sat, 24 Jul 2010, Brandon Butterworth wrote: > >>>> Eventually ARIN (or someone else will do it for them) may create a site >> ... >>> Did you mean something like this maybe ?: >>> >>> http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/ula/ >> >> Q.E.D. >> >> The RFC seeks to avoid a registry so we end up with the potential for >> many as a result. May as well have had ARIN do it officially in the >> first place so there'd only be one. > > So, back when ULA was first proposed, some of us said (sometimes privately) > that there are only 2 rational options: > 1. Do it; with a persistent, guaranteed unique, global registry. > 2. Don't do it. > > Option 2 was a non-starter since there was too much critical mass. The > logical candidate to operate option 1 was the IANA, and the RIRs were having > none of that. (For bonus points, explain how the RIRs continue to exist if > everyone can have all of the guaranteed-globally-unique IPv6 space they > wanted for free.) > For bonus points, explain how the numbers side of IANA pays for anything when the RIRs stop funding it?
> So given the overwhelming force pulling at this thing from both directions, > you end up somewhere in the middle where no one wants to be. > > And BTW, the lottery is actually the perfect analogy for ULA, since no matter > how astronomical the odds against, eventually someone always wins. > Except in the case of ULA, hitting the jackpot is actually losing. Owen