Re: Again no multi6 at IETF#56

[Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>]

Kurt;

> >>> and state an opinion that 6bone address management responsibilities
> >>> should be transferred to RIRs only after multihoming issues are 
> >>> solved?
> >>>
> >>> It seems to be that it is a (perhaps the only) rough consensus of
> >>> multi6.
> >>>
> >>> Or, does so many of us think v6 addresses may be widely assigned
> >>> without multihoming issues solved?
> >>
> >> I am not following your reasoning. I don't see why we should not move
> >> address management to where it belongs, and what that have to do with
> >> the multi6 issue?
> >
> > Huh?
> >
> > Are you saying it already belongs to where it belongs that there
> > should be no BoF?
> >
> I am saying that address registration and allocation/assignment 
> management belongs with the RIRs.

How, do you think, it should be managed?

"just like IPv4" is not an answer.

						Masataka Ohta