Doug Barton <do...@dougbarton.us> writes: > On 3/11/2012 3:15 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: >> But ARIN's action meant it never had a chance. I really don't get why they >> felt the need to start allowing IPv6 PI after a decade > > Because as far back as 2003 ARIN members (and members from all the other > RIRs for that matter) were saying in very clear terms that PI space was > a requirement for moving to v6. No one wanted to lose the provider > independence that they had gained with v4. Without that, v6 was a total > non-starter. > > ARIN was simply listening to its members.
It didn't help that there was initially no implementation of shim6 whatsoever. That later turned into a single prototype implementation of shim6 for linux. As much as I tried to keep an open mind about shim6, eventually it became clear that this was a Gedankenexperiment in protocol design. Somewhere along the line I started publicly referring to it as "sham6". I'm sure I'm not the only person who came to that conclusion. Grass-roots, bottom-up policy process + Need for multihoming + Got tired of waiting = IPv6 PI -r
