[arin-ppml] ARIN Advisory Council Thoughts about IPv4 Policies

[James Hess]

On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Sweeting, John
<john.sweeting at twcable.com> wrote:

> Thank you for your input. The main point is that the AC believes that it is >getting too late in the game to continue changing the rules.
[snip]

It is never really too late in the game to make changes to the rules,
if the change is beneficial,  with obvious caveats, such as changes
would be useless after a certain point,  ARIN  can't  de-allocate IPs,
and there might be some unfair possibilities which should not be
chosen, even if available.

Increasing uncertainty about IPv4  future availability might actually
be beneficial and encourage  planners to think about IPv6 adoption.
But actually one thing that is certain is IPv4 will run out.


Per the PDP, it should be up to the community and membership when that
time has been reached to stop revising certain policy, not for the AC
to dictate,  and  start abandoning arbitrarily proposals  that have
solid merit,  because they think they are too disruptive, or not
overwhelmingly massively supported.

If  people have plans that would be disrupted,  those people that have
plans should be in the community, and present to voice their issues or
objections.


I realize some organizations want to make some operational and
budgetary plans, and some types of proposals could potentially
compromise or effect some types of plans.

However, that is always a risk.   All businesses have to deal with the
risk that outside changes may render their plans obsolete,  and in the
case of IPv4 addressing near exhaustion,  policy changes by RIRs
should definitely be expected and factored into all planning.

Actually,  the community's  ability to anticipate what will happen
with exhaustion is very limited.    I  estimate it very likely  that
changes could be called for,   if  it turns out,  for instance,  that
 the policy at the time turns out to not be working correctly...

--
-J