[arin-ppml] Discussion Petition of ARIN-prop-125 Efficient Utilization of IPv4 Requires Dual-Stack

[Robert E. Seastrom]

William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> writes:

>> I must take issue with your suggestion that the AC "dropped the ball".
>
> Allow me to rephrase: IF the AC dumps even a modest proposal to tie
> continued eligibility for IPv4 to deployment of IPv6 THEN I would
> consider the AC to have dropped the ball and would therefore support a
> petition to override the AC's judgment.

I don't think that phrase ("dropped the ball") means what you think it
does.  "Does the AC agree with Bill Herrin" is a question orthogonal
to "Is the AC following the PDP".

> As it stands, I think the AC
> made the right call on proposal 125, hence I do not support the
> petition to move it forward to formal discussion.

Well, it's open for discussion as long as the community wants to
discuss it.  It's just not on the AC's docket.

>> In the same vein, I also encourage you to consider that the whole
>> concept, while well-intentioned, is simply "made of fail" when it
>> comes time to actually implement it.
>
> Maybe. My working assumption is that its a PIA to -get started-
> working with IPv6. Once started, enough folks will follow through to
> build up the critical mass needed to make it all happen. If that
> assumption is valid, then a proposal that merely requires folks to get
> started with their IPv6 deployment will get the job done. If that
> assumption proves wrong, then we might consider more forceful
> policy... but what do we lose trying the lighter hand first?

I do not believe this problem will be solved with policy.  I believe
that the economics of the transfer market vs. the equipment market
will make the proper course of action crystal clear at the CxO level
over the next couple of years and does not require policy action.

-r