[arin-ppml] Portable address space vs. IPv6 auto-numbering

[Milton L Mueller]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net 
> 
> As for the argument that a relatively small fraction of the IP
> addresses currently advertised are actually in use, well
> whether "the market" coughs up those "3.7B which could be advertised"
> IPv4 addresses, or whether it doesen't, POST IPv4 runout, is
> at this point really just speculation.  

The degree to which that happens is highly uncertain, but it's a bit
more than speculation. We know that gray market IP address transfers
have already been going on, and we have experience with secondary
markets in other resources, such as bandwidth and spectrum. 

> We won't know until after
> IPv4 runout.

Two points. First, I don't understand why you need to wait for what you
call "IPv4 runout" (see point 2) to permit transfers. You could do it
tomorrow. Second, and pardon me if this sounds pedantic, but people who
understand price systems know that resources don't literally "run out"
unless there is something drastically wrong with the social systems used
to ration them. They become increasingly scarce and expensive. We will
never, for example, actually "run out" of oil. It may eventually become
so scarce that you only see it in tiny vials displayed as jewelry around
the necks of beautiful models, but it won't "run out." 

More importantly, I am wondering how you view the impact of v4 transfer
markets on the v6 transition. This seems an important issue. Let's
suppose it is fantastically successful at prolonging the life of v4
Internet by releasing many unused address resources. Does it then
discourage v6 migration? Or does it over the longer term improve the
value proposition for v6 by making the fees/costs associated with v6
addresses look more favorable?