[arin-ppml] *Spam?* Re: Discussion Petition of ARIN-prop-125 Efficient Utilization of IPv4 Requires Dual-Stack

[Frank Bulk]

You mean like me?  That's why we have a tunnel to HE. =(

That's not throwing them to the wolves, that's providing them extra
incentive to talk to their IP packet suppliers.

Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Kargel [mailto:kkargel at polartel.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 3:50 PM
To: 'frnkblk at iname.com'; 'Jason Schiller'
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: RE: *Spam?* Re: [arin-ppml] Discussion Petition of ARIN-prop-125
Efficient Utilization of IPv4 Requires Dual-Stack

> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
> Behalf Of Frank Bulk
> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 3:36 PM
> To: 'Jason Schiller'
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: *Spam?* Re: [arin-ppml] Discussion Petition of ARIN-prop-125
> Efficient Utilization of IPv4 Requires Dual-Stack
> 
> Jason:
> 
> Owen made some compelling arguments that have given me food for thought.
> 
> That said, at this time the petition would:
> a) need to adjust the definition of "real deployment for IPv6" to
> accommodate for content, eyeball, and any other kind of network.  While
> the
> devil is in the details, I currently can't think of any requestor that
> could
> say they would never need IPv6 anywhere in their network.  If getting IPv4
> space is important, they'll find some way to make IPv6 happen in their
> network.  If they can't justify it, then they'll make other accomodations.

What about the networks for whom in the near future at least IPv6 is
unobtainable?  Are you just going to throw them to the wolves because they
are geographically in the third world portion of the United States?