[arin-ppml] Q1 - ARIN address transfer policy: whythetriggerdate?
Lee at dilkie.com
Mon Jun 23 17:42:40 EDT 2008
Finally... something that makes sense...
Paul Vixie wrote:
> 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."
I think we all agree that deploying IPv6/dual-stack is a cost with no
short term benefit. And it's natural for all parties to want everyone
else to bear the cost, themselves excluded. Like government mandated
pollution and mileage targets on automobiles, sometimes only an edict
will suffice to move all parties to the same level playing field at the
So. What do we propose? That all future IPv4 blocks be deployed by
customers/ISPs dual-stack, ARIN grants a matching IPv6 block with each
IPv4 grant and insists (checks up) that it be made available to end
customers (in an ISP's case?). Until you deploy dual stack, you won't
get any more blocks from ARIN?
This is essentially what the US government is doing to vendors, wrt
IPv6. I think it's not a bad argument that ARIN should be just as
insistent in "encouraging" IPv6 rollout.
More information about the ARIN-PPML