[ppml] IPv4 "Up For Grabs" proposal

[michael.dillon at bt.com]

> Most connected hosts do not need to accept inbound 
> connections, and an alternative would be say for ISPs to NAT 
> and PAT everything.

That used to be true 10 years ago, but the trend is against this. For
instance:
http://gizmoproject.com/  Standards based Voice over IP is spreading and
although there are ways to make it work with NAT and PAT, they are not
pretty and not a universal solution.

> In that case, ISPs ultimately reclaim public addresses not 
> used for servers, make customers pay dearly for each public 
> IP,

Even if an ISP did reclaim IPv4 addresses from consumer customers, I
doubt they would be able to make customers pay for an IPv4 address when
the competition is offering a free /48 using IPv6 with no NAT/PAT and no
restrictions regarding running servers.

Internal reclamation may indeed push back the runout date for IPv4 but
it will not remove the imperative to enable IPv6 services and IPv6
Internet access.

--Michael Dillon