[arin-ppml] Use of "reserved" address space.

[Chuck Anderson]

On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 08:45:53AM -0700, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> >      * It would take forever to fix printers, fridges, and other
> >        appliances, along with routers, firewalls, and other middle boxes.
> >      * /4 is a honking lot of private address space that would benefit
> >        few.
> >      * /4 really doesn't buy us much time in terms of staving off or
> >        easing a transition
> >      * There are several v4/v6 transition protocols that base assumptions
> >        about private address space.
> >      * Better to focus on v6 transition.
> 
> Point #2 and #3 are valid concerns, particularly if the proposal is to
> make it more RFC1918 like space.  If it's public space, then the concern
> is quite silly, as a /4 could give us 2-3 more years, which I think is
> non-trival.

For public space, 16 more /8's at the current burn-rate of about one 
/8 per month[1] only gives us 1.25 - 1.5 years at most.  I think that 
is a trivial amount of time that doesn't make it worth the pain to use 
240/4 for public space.

[1] http://ipv4depletion.com/?page_id=4