[arin-ppml] IPv4 Depletion as an ARIN policy concern

[Warren Johnson]

-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Maimon [mailto:jmaimon at chl.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 12:06 PM
To: Warren Johnson
Cc: tvest at eyeconomics.com; 'ARIN PPML'
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IPv4 Depletion as an ARIN policy concern



Warren Johnson wrote:
>  And if we're all on
> ipv4 anyway, why bother spending the money on ipv6?

These potential problems and scenarios have all been discussed in one form
or another and many people have differing opinions on which are most likely.


>>>>>>>>>> 
and your point?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<



> 
> Let us also consider the potential power of the ipv4 cartel.  Right 
> now the big boys in the USA (ATT, Comcast, Time Warner Cable) are 
> among the largest non-legacy IP holders.

True.

>  A  more likely scenario is "Officially, let's have an
> ipv6 policy but let's not really push ipv6 because ipv4 gives us a 
> virtual monopoly on this market, stiffles competition and makes us 
> more powerful and rich".

Speculation.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
yes, entirely speculation. But, as a business executive I can tell you that
my responsibility to the shareholders trumps many many things.........
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I tend to believe that things are the way they are because there wasnt any
much better way to do things and that people are proceeding with good faith
and intentions, but with their own interests in the forefront.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I wouldn't be so sure that everyone is proceeding with good faith and
intentions.  All of that goes out the window when corporate interest starts
smelling the blood.  And really, aren't "their own interests in the
forefront" and "good faith and intentions" likely to be mutually exclusive
in a scarcity situation?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<


It is definitely possible that various board level management of the timing
of all this is concerned with the bottom line more than we think they should
be.  However, we should not jump to conclusions and accusations. There are
bound to be plenty of those from people less familiar with the state of
things.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
True, best not to jump to conclusions.  However, failing to plan is planning
to fail.  And we must expect the market to take over as it tends to do.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


> 
> Here is something everyone needs to consider VERY CAREFULLY:
> 
> The current ipv4 stakeholders have an economic incentive to block or 
> delay the transition because it drives up the value of their IPv4
holdings.
> 

I think it is more important to consider that a bad reputation of address
management and consumption, deserved or not is not going to be helpful down
the near term road.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Bad address management and consumption is subjective.  Also, it can be
irrelevant if we are in a cartel-like situation because new-entrants have no
real ability to complain. 
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

There is still time to make an effort to correct any injustices or
inequities perceived or real, trumped up or accurate, mistaken or not.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Vague.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Joe


Thanks JOE!!