[arin-ppml] [Fwd: Draft Policy 2011-5: Shared Transition Space for IPv4 Address Extension]
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
>> How about guaranteeing new entrants? Or those with only a thimbleful
>> compared to those with buckets? Options for these folks will be a whole lot
>> more limited. I submit that it is a much larger problem for these folks to
>> deploy LSN and whatever else will continue to be required until it truly is
>> the year of IPv6.
> This interests me. Are you saying that IPv4 space should be limited to
> small allocations in order to ensure that IPv4 stays open to new
> organizations while encouraging the migration to IPv6 for current
> heavy users?
Yes, there should be IPv4 space set aside available to those who have none.
I also believe there should be IPv4 space set aside available to those
who have next to none.
Apparently it is not a popular idea here.