[ppml] Proposed Policy: IPv4 Countdown

[Jay Sudowski - Handy Networks LLC]

>From a practical matter, I think it might be better to consider
address-reclamation as something that should have been occurring since
"the beginning of time" and not as a policy designed to stave off the
inevitable depletion of IPv4 space. 

If an organization needs to demonstrate a need (as defined by ARIN
policies) to obtain an IP allocation from ARIN, is it not logical that
they must continue to have such a need in order to keep their IP
allocation?  If an organization no longer needs the IP allocation,  ARIN
should reclaim the allocation as a matter of normal operations. 

I am new to the list, and so please forgive me if my view is too
simplistic.  

-Jay Sudowski

 
-----Original Message-----
From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of
Stephen Sprunk
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 8:47 PM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt; Owen DeLong
Cc: ARIN PPML
Subject: Re: [ppml] Proposed Policy: IPv4 Countdown

>>Do note that the projections for how long address-reclamation
>>efforts will extend the exhaustion are on the order of six months.
>>That means it'll take us longer to reach consensus and
>>implement the changes than the period of time we'll buy by
>>doing so, meaning we're better off _not_ doing it and instead
>>spending our time figuring out how to get people on IPv6.
>
> Ah, now the truth comes out.  You want IPv6 and are happy to see
> reclamation efforts on IPv4 fail so it hastens the day for IPv6.

We do not have a choice.  The IPv4 address space _will_ be exhausted,
and 
it'll happen in about four years if we do nothing.  The best
projections, by 
people who are quite authoritative on the matter, is that reclamation
will 
buy us six more months.  If you want to claim, as you did in another 
message, that it'll really buy us 5-10 years, you need to come up with 
better studies and data than we already have.  And we'll be in the same
boat 
again after that much time anyways, so we might as well save the effort
and 
convert now before we buy/deploy _another_ hundred million routers and
PCs.

I don't buy the "all the studies show I'm wrong, but let's try it
anyways 
and find out while wasting millions of dollars and putting off our only 
remaining viable option" argument.  But that's just me; float an _actual

proposal_ and see what others think.

S

* If one asserts that higher fees would discourage consumption, one must

also accept that lower fees would encourage consumption.  Either
consumption 
is linked to price or it isn't.

Stephen Sprunk      "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723         are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS                                             --Isaac Asimov 


_______________________________________________
This message sent to you through the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List
(PPML at arin.net).
Manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml