[ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Soft Landing (version 2.0)

[Howard, W. Lee]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On 
> Behalf Of Edward Lewis
> 
> A not so cynical question - has any government officially 
> expressed any concerns about the IPv4 situation? 

Many governments (or parts) have issued papers or orders calling
for a transition to IPv6.  Japan was an early leader, but you
can search for any country and "IPv6" on Google and find 
something.

The UN's Internet Governance Forum meeting #2 will apparently 
be holding workshops that may be relevant.  Several governments 
have suggested that the ITU would be a better place for numbers 
and names to be managed that the current registries.  If you 
read through the comments at 
http://www.intgovforum.org/Comments_draft_prog_Rio.html
you find that several governments have concerns about the 
current Internet "governance" structures.

I haven't found any direct messages from government agencies
predicting the death of the Internet, but then I wouldn't
expect to.  Public servants are paying attention when it's
their job to, but elected politicians aren't, much, yet.
While fearmongering can by politically useful, causing panic 
(especially around business infrastructure) generally isn't,
and is not the decision of civil servants.

> I.e., how important is it that at least one of the IPv4 
> run-out proposals make it through the Policy Development 
> Process to implementation?

I think everyone should support or oppose policies as they
believe is best for the Internet.  I have great confidence
in this community to apply experience and understanding to
come to consensus around good policies.  Keep doing that, 
and it's harder to argue that the current system doesn't
work.


Lee