[arin-ppml] Internet means IPv6 (was: some other long subject line)

[Lee Howard]

> From: Matthew Kaufman <matthew at matthew.at>
> Sent: Thu, December 30, 2010 2:01:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] *Spam?* Re: Discussion Petition of ARIN-prop-125 
> Efficient Utilization of IPv4 Requires Dual-Stack

> Why is putting 100 legacy machines on the public network of less value than 
> putting 100 new machines on the public network? 

What public network?
If you want to provide a bridge for a PC with arcnet and netx.com, so it can
ping your token-ring OS/2 machine, or get finger'd by your ATM Irix box,
use rfc1918.  If you want "Internet access," (with a capital I) that term will 
soon mean IPv6.   In 2012, there will be no expectation of connectivity over 
IPv4; if devices are unavailable over IPv6, it will be the responsibility of the 

laggard to upgrade.

> it does make sense to set aside 
> *some* of the space for people who need IPv4 addresses *specifically* to 
>operate 
>
> their IPv6-IPv4 transition technologies, but that's it. Once you've set that 
> aside there is nothing that makes any one need for IPv4 space more important 
> than another unless you want to have a "homeowners association" that starts 
> reviewing each application on its public-interest benefits and choice of web 
> page background color.

What is the value of "some," and how is in inarbitrary?
Or does it make sense for ARIN's analysts to be able to apply a set of
objective criteria for evaluating requests?  That has been ARIN's practice.

Lee