[ppml] Summary of Trial Balloons for Dealing with IPv4AddressCountdown

David Williamson wrote:
> Neither the users or the applications care if it's IPv4 or IPv6.  It's
> completely irrelevant to the vast majority of either group.  Unless
> it's software for controlling networking devices or a user like one of
> us, the difference is almost irrelevant.
>   
Except that there *is* a lot of s/w that will have to change. Most
business s/w has moved to a client-server model for years now and that
will be affected. E-mail, bug tracking, source code change systems, sap,
workgroup productivity, VoIP, video conferencing, business intelligence.
Any piece of s/w that creates a socket or makes/displays/inputs an
address is affected. It's a long list and smells a lot like Y2K.

While the cost of upgrading switching infrastructure and re-training IT
staff can be relatively accurately estimated, the same is not true for
legacy s/w.

And for that reason I think the corporate world might hang on a lot
longer than the home user.

Regardless to all that. I question ARINs role in this. In my mind the
move will happen when it does and probably at the best speed (too early
and costs are high, too late and productivity is lost). The decision
will occur at different intervals and for different reasons.

For that reason I object to a social engineering role that would have
ARIN essentially making the decision of 'when'. I don't see how that is
ARIN's mandate.

I especially don't like the idea of taxing users for something that
wasn't previously a cost just to encourage a behaviour. We know how that
generally works out, those with money can afford to ignore the nudge and
those without money are forced to spend either on keeping the status quo
or spend on an unneeded or pre-mature upgrade.

If you truly believe that the move is in the best interests of all, then
use a carrot. Offer money to give up address blocks. I'll bet your
shrinking ipv4 space problem will have a longer horizon.

-lee