[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 122: Reserved Pool for Future Policy Development

[William Herrin]

On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> To put it simply, we have set aside a "Dedicated IPv4 block to
>> facilitate IPv6 Deployment", and I am arguing that we may need a
>> "Dedicated IPv4 block to keep the IPv4 internet from falling apart".
>> I can't be sure though, and I can't be sure we can't do both.
>> Reserve it all, find out what goes wrong and where the need is
>> greatest, and then pass a policy quickly to address it.  1-3 months
>> of no space followed by relief where it is needed most is far more
>> useful than the chance blowing the space on something other than
>> the greatest need.
>
> We know we will need a dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6
> deployment.

We do? For what? NAT64? It's looking less likely by the day, or at
least less likely that it will be used prior to waning IPv4 when v6 is
ubiquitous enough for ISPs to safely start to dismantle their IPv4
infrastructure (and thus by definition have plenty of IPv4 addresses
available).


> We may need a dedicated IPv4 block to keep the IPv4 internet from
> falling apart

Yes, that could actually be valuable. Facilitating tech like v4 carrier NAT.

-Bill


-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004