Thus spake "Brian Haberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Margaret Wasserman wrote: > > This would appear to be incompatible with the IANA considerations > > section that says: > > > >> If deemed > >> appropriate, the authority may also consist of multiple organizations > >> performing the authority duties.
How about: IANA MAY delegate assignment capabilities to more than one entity. If this occurs, the various entities must assign addresses using a method that is indistinguishable from that of a single entity. Specifically, the method MUST prevent collisions between assignments by different entities and MUST NOT rely on subdividing the assignable address space in a manner that promotes or resembles any aggregation scheme. > >> - Available to anyone in an unbiased manner. > >> - Permanent with no periodic fees. > > > > It seems strange to say that there can be no periodic fees when the > > document doesn't mention fees anywhere else... Perhaps this is a > > leftover from previous versions of the document that did include > a fee > > structure? > > The purpose of the second bullet is to ensure the permanent allocation > of these prefixes. Periodic fees are inconsistent with permanent > allocations (e.g., what happens if someone were to stop paying the > periodic fee?, would the allocation be revoked and reassigned?). > > In addition, there is precedence for one-time, upfront fees such as > this. The IEEE mechanism for MAC addresses comes immediately to mind > as a similar model. I'm still trying to find a better phrasing for this. > > I am not sure that requiring a permanent escrow is consistent > with the > > idea that there will be no ongoing revenue stream (i.e. periodic > fees) > > associated with an address. > > The escrow is to simply ensure no duplication and allow for conflict > resolution. As described above the cost for maintaining an escrow can > be paid for with an charge at the time of the allocation. Would the escrow come into play if the allocating entity goes bankrupt or pulls out? i.e. how would these assignments get transferred to a new authority? Given the issues with NET and COM, should we specify that IANA is the owner of all assignment records (e.g. the escrow)? S Stephen Sprunk "Stupid people surround themselves with smart CCIE #3723 people. Smart people surround themselves with K5SSS smart people who disagree with them." --Aaron Sorkin -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
