[arin-ppml] Q1 - ARIN address transfer policy: whythetriggerdate?

[Paul Vixie]

> From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm at ipinc.net>
> ...
> It is a given that making something illegal isn't going to stop it from
> happening.  BUT, the idea that making IPv4 private-party to private-party
> address transfers sanctioned will not affect the IPv6 uptake rate is simply
> preposterous.
> 
> For the large orgs, there's not going to be enough IPv4 for sale to meet
> their needs, so this discussion isn't even on their radar.  But it does
> matter to the smaller orgs.  If you make these transfers sanctioned, there
> WILL be some smaller orgs who put off IPv6 migration plans, and purchase
> more IPv4.

it seems to me that until the rest of the world has upgraded, then any given
org (large or small) who wants to continue growing the externally reachable
parts of their network (like, for IP customers) will have to have a supply of
new ipv4, even if they're deploying dual-stack at such moments.  this has two
corollaries:

1. the time to dual-stack is $NOW, and arin should investigate new policies
that require proof of dual-stack intent and action $NOW for ipv4 allocations
starting $NOW; and,

2. the problem (as always) is other people's networks, and all arguments of
the form "ipv4's lifetime should not be extended" boil down to "it is bad for
$ME if $OTHER_PEOPLE aren't forced to run dual-stack and get ipv6 running."

for the record, the positions i'm representing on PPML are my own and do not
nec'ily reflect those of ARIN's Board of Trustees, of which i am a member.

paul vixie