[arin-ppml] IPv6 Transition Policy (aka Soft Landing)

[Owen DeLong]

On Oct 10, 2010, at 8:28 PM, Matthew Petach wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Let me offer a general response to all of the great feedback:
>> 
>> The basic idea here is to redefine efficient utilization. The fact is
>> that at this point (and for quite some time now) IPv4 addresses that
>> are not deployed along with IPv6 addresses are simply not being
>> efficiently utilized. Just like assigning a v4/24 to a PTP link is
>> wasteful, deploying IPv4 only is wasteful.
> 
> I would argue that this is where the market will step in; this is a wonderful
> opportunity for Transition Service Providers to help providers who are not
> dual stacked get access to the portion of the Internet for which they do not
> have direct, native connectivity.
> 
> Why use policy to try to shape an outcome that can be achieved through
> normal market interplay, creating thousands of jobs in the process?
> 
Indeed, this approach has worked quite well as a job creation tactic
in the operating system world. Why hold Micr0$0ft accountable for their
security practices (or lack thereof) when you can, instead, let them
create a massive market for FUD and FUD-related products such as
anti-virus, anti-malware, firewalls, security suites, and vast numbers of
jobs writing various applications all intended to overcome the basic
shortcomings of their products?

Having watched from the sidelines as the industry poured buckets
of money into that pit, I have to say I don't really relish the thought
of repeating that exercise on the internet.

I'm not sure that this particular proposal is a great idea, but, I will say
that your "kill 'em all and let the market gods sort 'em out" analogy
definitely doesn't help the case for inaction.
> 
> 
> Let's not try to wrap our heads too much around the idea of "fairness";
> the market is driven by imbalances in resource allocation, and it's in
> the transfer of unequally distributed resources that money is to be
> made.
> 
In other words, since somebody can get rich from it, other peoples
pain is OK and should be encouraged. An interesting view of the
world.

Owen