[arin-ppml] DRAFT POLICY ARIN-2011-1: GLOBALLY COORDINATEDTRANSFER POLICY (Legecy space)

[Matthew Kaufman]

On Apr 13, 2011, at 10:44 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:

> 
> Let me attempt to explain it a  bit more accurately:
> 
> The Mueller theory:
> --------------------------
> At T1, upgrading network to IPv6 costs $1000, more ipv4 addresses cost $1000. However, more IPv4 addresses will
> 	allow T1's users to reach the still-only-on-IPv4 parts of the internet while upgrading to IPv6 without IPv4 addresses
> 	will leave T1's users without such access, or, with severely degraded access to those parts of the internet that are
> 	still IPv4-only. Rational actor picks buying more v4.
> At T2, upgrading network to IPv6 costs $1000, more ipv4 addresses cost $2000. Same constraints on the usefulness
> 	of the IPv4 addresses apply. "Rational" actor ignores this disparity of usefulness and chooses the cheap
> 	connectivity. T2 loses his customers as a result and goes bankrupt. The price of IPv4 addresses drops as
> 	T2s IP addresses are now available cheap in a bankruptcy fire sale.
> 
> The DeLong theory:
> --------------------------
> At T1, upgrading network to IPv6 costs $1000, more ipv4 addresses cost $1000. However, more IPv4 addresses will
> 	allow T1's users to reach the still-only-on-IPv4 parts of the internet while upgrading to IPv6 without IPv4 addresses
> 	will leave T1's users without such access, or, with severely degraded access to those parts of the internet that are
> 	still IPv4-only. Rational actor picks buying more v4. Further, since T1 sees the writing on the walls, he also spends
> 	$1,000 to upgrade his network to IPv4/IPv6 dual-stack so that his customers can reach both the IPv4 and the IPv6
> 	capable parts of the internet.
> At T2, upgrading network to IPv6 costs $1000, more ipv4 addresses cost $2000. Same constraints on the usefulness
> 	of the IPv4 addresses apply. "Rational" actor recognizes that keeping his customer has a value in excess of
> 	the price disparity and purchases the more expensive IPv4 addresses. Unfortunately, this unexpected additional
> 	cost of IPv4 addresses means that the $1000 he was planning on spending to get to IPv6 has now been
> 	diverted into the additional cost of IPv4 and there is no money to upgrade to IPv6. The provider is now trapped
> 	in a very difficult position where it will become ever-increasingly expensive to grow his network with IPv4,
> 	but he desperately needs capital to deploy IPv6.
> 
> Does this make sense to anyone?

No, because I can't tell if "T2" is a participant who isn't "T1" or a time later than "T1"

Matthew Kaufman