[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 2008-6

[Joe Maimon]

Randy Bush wrote:
>>>> There will be (are) many small businesses who will need IP
>>>> addresses and depend on them for their business who will not be
>>>> able to afford them.
>>> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-062-v002.html
>> An excellent policy and an excellent stalling tactic, but you must
>> recognize it as a stalling tactic and not a policy that will support
>> IPv4 growth in perpetuity.
> 
> ain't nothin' gonna support ipv4 growth.  a distinct problem with a 
> small set of finite integers.  ah well.
> 

Suppose class E, legacy unannounced swamp reclamation, tighter policies 
with smaller allocations producing a fraction of current burn rate and 
incentivized returns/transfers would extend ipv4 life far longer than 
anybody would want.

Including long enough to kick in more space from ipv6/NAT conversions. 
So in effect, ipv4 integers forever being available is actually possible.

Technically speaking, 25-50% of ipv4 may still be available to be used 
on the internet, even after pool runout.

Picture explaining the justification for unavailability of every single 
/8 before a congressional hearing or similar, anyone want that job?

(If there is even the remotest of possibilities of using E space, than 
reclaiming it should start sooner rather than later)