[arin-ppml] Revised -- Policy Proposal 2009-4: IPv4 RecoveryFund

[David Farmer]

On 13 Apr 2009 Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> > I disagree, publicizing that it is expensive and risky to stick with
> > IPv4 would help drive people toward the stability and 
> > generally lower cost of IPv6.
> > 
> 
> NOT publicizing it is even more effective, as people invariably
> assume it's more expensive than it really is.
> 
> Which do you immediately assume is more expensive?
> 
> An expensive
> snooty restaurant with a 5 star cook that charges $60 a steak?
> Or an expensive snooty restaurant with a 5 star cook that doesn't
> put the prices on the menu and has the attitude that if you have
> to ask, you cannot afford it.

Ok, that works for some people, but, what if you have the boss 
that says prove to them it will be more expensive to stay with 
IPv4, and cheaper to go with IPv6.  Without public data, on 
how expensive IPv4 is, how do you make a business case that 
IPv6 is the better way to go? 

I agree that the current daily or hourly price could be use in 
ways the community doesn't want.  I can accept that there 
should be a 15 or 30 day delay on the release of pricing data, 
so maybe you don't release February's data until March 15th or 
March 31st.  But, we need reasonably current pricing data for 
people to make business cases with.  Even the business case 
we would like them to make, like going to IPv6, will take some 
data.  The trick is to provide data, without it being so current 
that the release of the data might cause speculative blips in the 
pricing, there has got to be a balance some where.

> Ted




================================================
=======
David Farmer				     Email:	
farmer at umn.edu
Office of Information Technology
Networking & Telecomunication Services
University of Minnesota			     Phone:	612-626-
0815
2218 University Ave SE			     Cell:		
612-812-9952
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029		     FAX:	612-626-
1818
================================================
=======