Person profile
PersonPublic policy participant
The available evidence covers Roles: Trustee (IETF Trust).
Source description Public policy participant
Marshall Eubanks, Resigned 15 November 2012
public people profile
Marshall Eubanks <>
public people profile
Last updated: 2026-09-26
Source facts
Viewpoint consistency: Consistent
Eubanks first argued that IPv6-only deployments should qualify and that city or metropolitan boundaries were a poor proxy for network topology. He later supported adopting 2005-1 to keep provider-independent address availability broad and avoid incentives to hoard it. The later multicast analogy is expressly an observation about misplaced scaling concerns, and the IETF BOF proposal adds coordination rather than opposing the policy. The retained record therefore shows a compatible, qualified position rather than a demonstrated reversal.
2005-1: Provider Independent IPv6 Assignments for End-sites
Assessment: Consistent · Eubanks first argued that IPv6-only deployments should qualify and that city or metropolitan boundaries were a poor proxy for network topology. He later supported adopting 2005-1 to keep provider-independent address availability broad and avoid incentives to hoard it. The later multicast analogy is expressly an observation about misplaced scaling concerns, and the IETF BOF proposal adds coordination rather than opposing the policy. The retained record therefore shows a compatible, qualified position rather than a demonstrated reversal.
Conditions: The 24 January 2006 multicast message is a general procedural observation and does not state a different eligibility position. · The retained statements do not establish whether every requested eligibility change entered the adopted policy text.
I do not think it should be the only requirement
Just an observation.
Clearly, I think
I would suggest a BOF at the Montreal IETF.
Viewpoint consistency: No explicit position stated
Viewpoint consistency: No explicit position stated
