[arin-ppml] PolicyProposal:EquitableDistributionofIPv4Resources before IPv4 Run out

Thus spake "Alexander, Daniel" <Daniel_Alexander at Cable.Comcast.com>
> Who likes the idea of a policy to handle an IANA depleted situation,
> where the smaller organizations are less effected, in order to buy them
> time, while the larger organizations are forced towards IPv6. It is the
> largest IP consumers who will drive the vendors, and develop the market
> for IPv6 enabled equipment. It is the smallest organizations who need to
> remain on IPv4 until the shift has gained the necessary momentum.
>
> When the IANA pool is depleted, regardless of whether there is a black
> market, or a paid transfer policy, it is very difficult to see a
> sufficient supply of IPv4 resources, for the extra-large ISP. This means
> that these ISP will hit the wall first, and hit it the hardest. It is
> also this group who is more able to bear the burden of working with
> equipment vendors, and software developers, to push the necessary
> momentum towards IPv6. Would a policy proposal that supports this model
> be preferred by the community?

While I agree with what you're saying, I think that's also what will happen 
_without_ any policy to cause it.

Large operators know their burn rate and how many customers they can add 
before we all hit the wall, and they know they have to be planning for it 
(and pressuring their vendors) now.  The rest of us don't really have the 
power to do anything until a certain half-dozen ISPs that serve most of the 
eyeballs in North America roll out v6, after which the equipment and 
software will be available for everyone else to follow them.

S

Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking