[arin-ppml] Accusation of fundamental conflict of interest/IPaddress policy pitched directly to ICANN

Ray Hunter v6ops at globis.net
Mon May 2 13:19:24 EDT 2011

Anyone interested in some DECnet phase IV addresses?

They're pretty rare: Only 63 areas are available, each allowing 1023 nodes!

I also have 2^32 valid IPv4 addresses. [Just don't try routing them on 
the Public Internet, but they'll work fine for your own use]

Maybe we should set up a new global registry?

Sound ludicrous?

The point being that globally unique IPv4 addresses will only have value 
to a corporation whilst the majority of their target customers continue 
to use them as on today's consensus-based Internet.

If all of your customers have migrated to IPv6, they're worthless

If the IPv4 Internet has fragmented, they're worthless.

Is it 100% clear to everyone who actually "owns" all of the current IPv4 
address allocations today?

Also, the future of the Internet is clearly mobile. There are already 
about as many mobile Internet users in China as there are people in the 
US, if not more. Same story in India. Even in the US, there simply won't 
be enough IPv4 addresses to cover a mass move to mobile devices no 
matter how much you're prepared to pay for them.

So assuming that any semblance of an efficient market in globally unique 
IPv4 numbers can be created now is IMHO highly questionable.

Your mileage may vary.

In any case, my personal preference would be to ask ARIN to at least 
adopt a policy (for the remaining unallocated IPv4 addresses from the 
ranges that it has been allocated by IANA) that works "in the best 
interests of the Internet community" by rewarding a migration to IPv6 
over anything attempting to further extend the useful life of IPv4, 
because that is clearly a lost cause. To that end, I personally like the 
APNIC last /8 policy that somewhat protects new entrants and allows them 
to deploy at least some useful backwards compatible connectivity to the 
IPv4 Internet e.g. via stateful NAT64. That existing APNIC last /8 
policy could of course potentially be improved upon, taking into account 
local ARIN regional drivers.

You may well yet see "registry shopping" by large organisations. So any 
policy that ARIN adopts may well have knock on impact to other RIR's, 
and thus may have to be reviewed at another level to ensure that this is 
not detrimental to the functioning of the other RIR's, or the Internet 
as a whole.

Just my 2c worth.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110502/5d42eb38/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list