[ppml] NANOG IPv4 Exhaustion BoF

On 4 mrt 2008, at 22:01, David Conrad wrote:

>> Leo Bicknell made the point that without this policy or something
>> like it, the world becomes set in stone after IPv4 runout.  Haves
>> have and have nots have not and there's no way for that to change.

> To be blunt, this strikes me as astoundingly hallucinatory.

Your bluntness is duly noted.

> Without some form of transfer policy, ARIN simply becomes irrelevant
> as address consumers go to the "black" market in order to meet their
> requirements.

Let me try to be blunt as well:

Who the **** cares what happens when we're out of IPv4 space? Because  
then we'll be out of IPv4 space, and the if THAT isn't enough to get  
people to adopt IPv6, we might as well all go home and read up on the  
X.25 specs because this internet thing will be over and done with very  
quickly.

There is one message and one message only: IPv6. Learn it. Love it,  
don't love it, but either way, make sure you RUN it 4 years from now  
if there is even the slightest chance that you may need new IP  
addresses after that.

> With a transfer policy, ARIN _may_ retain some relevance as a source
> of "title" information, but a lot depends on the restrictions ARIN
> attempts to impose.  Make the policy too restrictive, and people will
> go elsewhere.

The part that I'm still waiting to see answered is how the rest of the  
world gets access to the excess IPv4 legacy space that exists in the  
ARIN region. A policy that only allows transfer of space between  
entities in the ARIN region certainly won't fly with the likes of the  
WTO.