[arin-ppml] An article of interest to the community....

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Fri Sep 2 18:36:38 EDT 2011

Sent from my iPad

On Sep 2, 2011, at 8:33, Chris Engel <cengel at conxeo.com> wrote:

> My sole point with this discussion, which seems to have gone off on a tangent, is that ARIN is not and should not become (IMO) "The Society for the Promotion of IPv6".  ARIN is the organization that is responsible for number resources in this region..... and it should (IMO) pretty much be neutral in how it approaches that responsibility in regards to IPv4, IPv6 or IPv99. It shouldn't entertain the idea of making number resources of one type harder to get then another in order to promote the other. Nor should it act to reduce the amount of one type of resource available in THIS REGION in order to promote the use of another variety.
Agreed, actually.

> More specifically ARIN shouldn't entertain the notion of transferring IPv4 resources that will be needed in THIS region out of the region simply because that is likely to reduce the available pool of IPv4 more quickly and thus spur the adoption of IPv6. That, IMO, would be an abdication of it's core responsibility.  If there is some other reason for allowing such transfers that DOES serve the interests of the community using IPv4 in this region, then great. That would be a legitimate rationale to support such policies...but astro-turfing IPv4 address space because maybe it'll help IPv6 growth isn't.

I actually agree with you here, too. However, I don't agree that we should not transfer resources out of region.

Just that the reason you state is not the reason to do so.

We should transfer the resources because we are world citizens on a global Internet. The fact that we happen to have a larger free pool than other regions that actually have a larger need is the reason we should transfer resources out of our region.

> Let IPv6 stand or fall on it's own merit. Make sure that there are no significant barriers in terms of Policy that would prevent people who want and have a legitimate need for IPv6 address space to obtain it (I think you guys already have that pretty much well in hand) but don't entertain the idea of standing behind folks with a cattle prod pushing them there if they think they are better served for the time being remaining on IPv4.

I agree. I do support the educational outreach efforts, but I do not think ARIN should be trying to force people to IPv6. Neither do I think ARIN should take heroic measures to keep IPv4 on life support for a protracted time. We should continue to issue and transfer number resources until IPv4 dies its natural death.



More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list