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

[Lee Dilkie]

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
> 'em".
>
> 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.

-lee