[ppml] PIv6 for legacy holders (/w RSA + efficient use)

[David Conrad]

Paul,

On Jul 30, 2007, at 2:12 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:
> as i have been shown the folly of ignoring your wisdom in the past,  
> please
> elucidate.  what other outcomes were measured for likeliness, and  
> why was
> this one selected?  (without the backup data, the above statement  
> still
> seems fatalistic to me, but my mind is open.)

You're missing the point.  Again, I'm not discussing possible  
transition strategies.  I'm simply pointing out that as available  
resources diminish, people tend to become more efficient in the use  
of those resources, particularly when there is a cost associated with  
obtaining them.  In the context of IPv4 free pool exhaustion, the  
implication of this is that people will tend to reduce their public  
address space footprint, most likely by making use of private address  
space and NAT where possible.  This may result in longer prefixes  
coming available as people figure out they don't need all of the  
legacy /8 they were given by Jon (and people are willing to pay for  
the subnets of that /8). They may also start deploying IPv6, if the  
cost/benefit ratio of that deployment makes sense (something that  
has, as can be seen empirically, not yet been demonstrated).

None of this is about destiny or fate or lofty ideals about what is  
"Good for the Internet"(tm).  It is about what makes business sense.

Rgds,
-drc