[arin-ppml] ARIN's Authority - One view (was: Re: LRSA concerns)

[bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com]

On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 12:38:55PM -0400, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Curran [mailto:jcurran at istaff.org]
> > It is questionable whether we can
> > keep the present Internet growing simply using IPv4.
> 
> Just to be clear, to advocate efficient management of scarcity in the
> IPv4 space does NOT entail a belief in indefinite extension of IPv4. It
> is simply asserts that the mechanisms used to manage IPv4 address
> resources should reflect the actual situation in that resource pool. 
> 
> > an irresponsible act with global economic consequences.  Due to
> > the inherent nature of IPv4/IPv6 interoperability, it's going to
> > be necessary for many organizations to run both in parallel for
> > some period of time in order to effect the transition.
> 
> Precisely, so IPv4 is going to be with us for a long time. Therefore its
> address space must be managed effectively and efficiently for some time.
> I have trouble understanding why this point is even controversial. There
> seems to be an attitude that as soon as the last free IPv4 block is
> allocated we can stop worrying about IPv4 resource management and
> (somehow) start pushing everyone into v6. This is a dangerous fantasy.
> Scarcity doesn't go away because you don't like it and wish it weren't
> there. Market forces don't disappear because you don't like markets and
> refuse to organize them properly. Conditions of scarcity in the ipv4
> space will affect the conduct and behavior of organizations, ISPs and
> indirectly, internet users for at least a decade. 
> 
> So if you don't have a strategy for responding to v4 address scarcity
> you're not being responsible. If you don't like transfers in ipv4 tell
> me what that strategy is. 
> _______________________________________________

(speaking only for myself, donning the robes and polishing the crystal...)

	ok, so I'm going out on a limb and will posit that properly used
	in the new period of coexistance, that IPv4 addresses are -NOT- 
	going to be the gating factor - claims of "address scarcity" will
	be used by those who wish to exploit fear, uncertainty and doubt
	into monetary gain, either as a direct party or as a broker.

	when all anyone will ever need is a few addresses to gateway into
	the increasingly smaller IPv4 world - there will be an abundance
	of IPv4 space ... (which will still need to be managed/accounted for)

	part of your premise seems to be that the purpose/use of IPv4
	will not change.  And if that premise is correct, then your fear-mongering
	language (dangerouse fantasy, scarcity) is warrented.  And we are
	all in trouble because there are not enough v4 addresses to go around -
	GIVEN that the use/purpose does not change.

	But the use/purpose of IPv4 will change and while there may be some 
	uncomfortable points in a transition/coexistance epoch, the end result
	will be an abudnance of IPv4 ... which no one will find interesting.

	in a nutshell - a possible strategy is to repurpose IPv4.
	want another one?

--bill