[ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal
Davis, Bob
rdavis at nal.usda.gov
Fri Feb 15 13:16:50 EST 2008
- Previous message: [ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal
- Next message: [ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
HD-TV over the air does provide higher quality (no ghost images) and higher definition TV image (I get 1080i on some channels). --- Bob -----Original Message----- From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Scott Leibrand Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 10:41 AM To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: ppml at arin.net Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > That is why the HD-TV changeover is the way it is. I don't want to > beat a dead horse but I keep returning to this analogy because it's > an example of a technological upgrade done properly. ALL of the > consmers get screwed over ALL at the SAME time, so there isn't any > of this nonsense of upsetting the various broadcasters markets - > your not for example increasing ABC's market share because NBC went > to HD-TV before they did. Everyone goes to it all at the same time. > Consumers have no recourse but to spend the money for converters or > new TV's. The increased content is available all at the same time. Don't most HDTVs get hooked up to Cable or Satellite networks, rather than broadcast? And isn't the flag-day required broadcast conversion just to *digital* broadcasting, not to *HD*? I don't own a TV (analog or digital, SD or HD) myself, but I get the impression that the switch to HD is actually being driven by demand from Cable and Satellite users who want to watch the HD programming they provide. If you really think our government could do a better job getting us converted to IPv6 than the industry can do on its own, feel free to write your congressperson. But ARIN is not a government, and we have to deal with the reality of the situation as it confronts us. That means continuing to make IPv4 addresses available as long as they're needed, and AFAICT a transfer policy is the only proposal on the table that can accomplish that. -Scott _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (PPML at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
- Previous message: [ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal
- Next message: [ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list