[ppml] [Re: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all]

[Steve Bertrand]

> We're about to see what happens with v4 switching from need to greed. 
> Let's see how that works out before thinking about changing v6.

IMHO, this may be backwards thinking.

Let me explain my thoughts:

We keep things as they are, waiting for impending D-Day of IPv4 runout,
then decide to change policy and governance on handing out of IPv6 space.

This may create a condition where we wouldn't have legacy holders (in
the v4 sense), but it may arise that when policy does change, perhaps
drastically after v4 runout, that there will be many, many organizations
that have already received their v6, been paying existing rates (etc)
that will then complain "that's not fair!".

We'll be having this same discussion down the road, but with far more
people who already have assignments to deal with that feel they did not
get a 'fair deal'.

There will be a scramble on v6 when v4 comes near it's end. Would this
type of action and possible condition not put too much strain on the
RIR's to keep focused on what they are supposed to be doing, as opposed
to dealing with complaints?

I believe that pro-active would be better than reactive.

Steve