[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-156 Update 8.3 to allow inter-RIRtransfers

Benson Schliesser bensons at queuefull.net
Fri Sep 2 20:30:33 EDT 2011

Hi, Bill and Paul.

On Aug 25, 2011, Bill Darte wrote:
> I think that Paul's point is a very important perspective worth vetting as it goes to the heart of the role of RIR as stewards of their own resources and how they relate to the global community.
> Inter-RIR transfers are a means to ensure that available resources go where they are needed. The debate within ARIN community has been...we need the resources we have..or will very soon, so no sense sharing with those who need them now outside of the region.
> I believe that Paul's point is that this perspective is counterproductive to ARIN's interests in getting this community to move to IPv6.

Not only is it counterproductive to interest in migrating to IPv6, but it encourages an unbalanced competitive field.  For instance, an ISP with access to IPv4 addresses in the ARIN region will have an upper-hand competing in Asia (during this period of transition), unless ARIN makes resources available more broadly. On one hand, this sounds good - since I live in North America. But on the other hand, all things considered, I think this is a bad situation.

On Aug 24, 2011, Paul Wilson wrote:
> 1. A smooth global IPv6 transition will rely on a critical mass of movement across the Internet;
> 2. No individual party is strongly motivated to move until they experience a shortage of IPv4 addresses.
> The availability of inter-regional IPv4 transfers will allow ongoing growth of IPv4 networks in the short term, but (more importantly in my opinion) it will serve to redistribute the motivation for IPv6 more evenly, with positive effect for the eventual IPv6 transition.

I'd like to add to this, by noting that there are many shades of "shortage" - and that we can discuss these in terms of cost.  In recent history, an IPv4 address has been inexpensive (RIR fees are relatively small on a per-address basis).  And in the near future, during a state of true and complete "exhaustion", the cost of an address will be relatively high (based on the business value enabled by the address).  Between now and then, in a market-driven address allocation environment, the prices will probably rise.  This will act as an encouragement for IPv6 transition, without the ugly scenario of "hitting a wall" or "driving off a cliff".

Of course, because the effectiveness of IPv6 requires that we all transition together, it would be undesirable for one region to "hit a wall" while another continues with artificially low prices based on RIR rationing.  I think Paul is wise for pointing this out.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list