[arin-ppml] Fairness of banning IPv4 allocations to somecategoryof organization

[Ted Mittelstaedt]

Geoff Huston wrote:

> 
> If we really want to submarine any hope whatsoever of a 
> transition to IPv6 this form of meddling in the address distribution 
> framework is about as good a negative intervention as one could possibly 
> imagine! 

A market-based ip allocation scheme encourages
choices that are lower initial cost instead of choices that are
higher initial cost - even though the higher initial cost choices
may have a far, far greater long term payback.

This is why you can take a century-old telephone and plug it in
to the modern POTS telephone network.  Advances in the subscriber
handsets ground to a halt 100 years ago in the United States, because
of lower-initial-cost short term decisions, first by Ma Bell,
then after the Carterfone decision, by individual end-user subscribers.

Going to a market-based IP allocation scheme is going to guarantee
another century of IPv4.  Perhaps that is why some people are
advocating it?

Ted