[ppml] IPv4 "Up For Grabs" proposal

On 7/6/07, Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm at ipinc.net> wrote:
>
>
> >patently false, chaos would ensue for all.   "legacy" space holders,
> >"grabbers", and everyone who has to decide whom to listen to when
> >these blocks are announced.
> >
>
> Why, all they have to do is look and see if the block is registered in
> an RIR.

Don't you mean RR?

First of all we will have to ignore hierarchical authentication, but
let's say for the sake of this argument that you and I could both
register a /8 when it became "up for grabs".

I register it in RIPE, you register it in ARIN on the same day.

Whose block is it then? The first to create the inetnum? The first to
create a route object?  if the RIRs have no role in adjudicating
disputes, then what? the courts? where, EU or US?

see, chaos.



>
> If there is no consensus on what to do with the IPv4 blocks held by the
> legacy holders after 20% of the Internet has become IPv6 only, then
> there is absolutely no point in proposing any further policies dealing with
> IPv4 runout, because people really honestly don't want to switch over.

I don't see the logic here.

I don't know why 20% is a magic number.

Some folk don't won't want to switch and might never, Those IPv4
registrations could be in RIR DBs in perpetuity. I don't see a problem
here.

>
> The IPv4 runout has become Somebody Else's Problem, and as long as it
> is such, Somebody Else is going to solve it.

This proposal would make it a problem for all.  Right now it's a
challenge, not a problem.

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
$ whois -h whois.afrinic.net mctim