[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2009-2: Depleted IPv4 reserves

[Ron Cleven]

Stephen's comments are spot on.  The large ISP's are the very ones who 
have both the resources and clout to make the IPv6 transition happen. If 
they are unwilling or unable to do so, what does that say about the 
viability of ever making that transition?  Mr. Wilder doth protest too 
much.


Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> Matthew Wilder wrote:
> 
>> I think there is definitely a place for a policy somehow limiting the 
>> size of allocations when there is less than 6 months to go in 
>> projected ARIN IP Address reserves.  I think a maximum allocation size 
>> of /20 is going to be too limiting for large ISPs (full disclosure, I 
>> work for TELUS, a large Canadian ISP).  This policy is unusually 
>> biased against the largest consumers of IP addresses.
> 
> 
> I agree that it is unusually biased, but the reality is that we're 
> running out of addresses, and when a handful of mega-ISPs (who are the 
> only ones with the power to make the IPv6 transition a reality) are 
> consuming 80%+ of the addresses, I can see the justification for 
> protecting the thousands of other orgs that have much more modest needs 
> and do _not_ have the power to transition to IPv6 until well after the 
> mega-ISPs have done so.
> 
> I'm not sure this policy is the best we can do (it's all stick and no 
> carrot), but I do agree with the general principles behind it and, 
> lacking any better options so far, must support it.
> 
> S
>