[discuss] Report from the BR meeting local organizing group - Dec 2013

[Jorge Amodio]

That proposal and subsequent meetings have been based on a long list of flawed assumptions, like that developing countries will not get their fare share of allocation of IPv6 address space and that allocation and assignment policies of IPv4 will be replicated for IPv6.

Rod Beckstrom at the time -big foot in the mouth situation- got in a public pissing contest with ITU fanboys that was a fascinating show of how much clue both sides had about this matter.

And following ITU openness many if not all the documents related to that WG require TIES access.

In summary ITU's claim that IPv6 allocation is broken is 100% bogus and unfounded.

-Jorge

> On Dec 24, 2013, at 2:44 AM, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> 
> In message <20131222141221.7A40A21AB6 at inbound-queue-3.mail.thdo.gradwell.net>, at 15:11:58 on Sun, 22 Dec 2013, JFC Morfin <jefsey at jefsey.com> writes
>>> eg (and no specific criticism intended, the something-is-broken-we-must-fix-it meme is pervasive) the ITU claiming IPv6 allocation is broken,
>> 
>> Would you have the URL of an ITU comprehensive review of the matter?
>> Thank you!
> 
> http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/others/ipv6/Pages/default.aspx for the meetings I was referring to.
> -- 
> Roland Perry
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss