[arin-ppml] Q1 - ARIN address transfer policy: whythetriggerdate?
Lee at dilkie.com
Tue Jun 24 07:55:54 EDT 2008
Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
> I don't think ARIN has the traction to enforce this, and as a member
> I'm not keen on ARIN gratuitously blowing its "war chest" on lawsuits
> over this sort of thing.
Sure it does. ARIN has the "traction" to enforce it's usage rules. It
can refuse additional requests if previous allocations have not met
utilization. ARIN can even revoke allocations if utilizations have not
been met. There's no war chest to worry about, it's simply a contractual
issue with the RSA.
> Historically, I've been in favor of making sure everyone has an IPv6
> netblock and various outreach programs so that they know what to do
> with them. Beyond that, though... in the words of Yogi Berra, "if
> the fans don't want to come out to the ball park, nobody's gonna stop
> As with many other technologies, there is a substantial last-mover
> advantage to going dual-stack or single-v6. Hard to fix that without
> resorting to force, and governments do like to reserve that capability
> for themselves alone.
> No matter how well-intentioned that idea is, actually trying to put it
> in motion is a Bad Plan.
The thing is. This isn't a simple battle over technologies, like beta
vs. VHS, and may the best tech win in the marketplace. We are dealing
with the runout of a common(shared) resource, which has bad consequences
for everyone. Like other governments (ARIN is essentially a government,
being a good steward of IP resources), perhaps we do need to push hard
for IPv6 adoption. Like minimum milage requirements and pollution
controls on automobiles, when dealing with the common good it is
sometimes necessary to simply force the matter by edict.
More information about the ARIN-PPML