I presume that was in jest, but just like to confirm if you have a legitimate beef with this draft policy.
Cheers, GTG -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Matthew Kaufman Sent: June-23-15 8:25 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2015-1: Modification to Criteria for IPv6 Initial End-User Assignments On 6/23/2015 1:07 PM, ARIN wrote: > Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2015-1 > Modification to Criteria for IPv6 Initial End-User Assignments > I am of mixed opinion on this policy. I agree that it should be quite easy for an organization to receive their own IPv6 space. And I was fully supportive until I got to "many smaller enterprises are unlikely to adopt IPv6 (currently perceived as an already tenuous proposition for most users given current cost/benefit)". Since there's still major barriers to deploying IPv6, despite this being over a decade since it should have happened, the amount of popcorn I am able to consume as an observer over the next few years if smaller enterprises find even more reasons to not adopt v6 (such as the one this policy wishes to correct) is vastly increased. I like popcorn, and so I'm opposed on that basis alone. Matthew Kaufman [email protected] _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
