[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2012-4: Return to 12 Month Supply and Reset Trigger to /8 in Free Pool

[Joe Maimon]

Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> My point is that convincing ourselves that we can extend that date is an act of fiction. In reality, we're already past runout and we have been for years if you define runout as the point at which genuine needs cannot be fully and rationally satisfied. We passed runout as far as I'm concerned at the point where we were no longer able to take every host that is currently behind NAT and put a public address on it instead.
>
> We've been out of IPv4 resources for years, but that's an inconvenient truth. So, instead we find new and different ways to lie to ourselves and pretend that the free pool today is not measured in the pain of others and that we can magically extend the life of that free pool, conveniently ignoring the pain such actions inflict.

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice and we 
have run out.

In practice, there is, and the evident fact is that there is still 
plenty to go around.

Hence, this discussion.

There could be quite more kept available, if the theorist did not keep 
stonewalling practical attempts at doing so.

>
>
> If the window stays at 3 months, it's not like those large requests don't still represent real need.

What theory glosses over is that need is relative, and elastic.

Actual practical use of IPv4 has demonstrated that over and again.


> The large requests are either spread out over 4 requests

Fine.

>   or we have managed to make the pain/cost of address acquisition exceed the value for those requestors (possibly to the expense and detriment of their customers).
Better.

>   Essentially, we have robbed $LARGE_REQUESTOR to provide resources to n * $SMALL_REQUESTORS where the value of n is unknown and n may actually be entirely made up of smaller requests from the same organization resulting in greater fragmentation of the routing table while not changing actual address consumption
>
> Owen

Your theory actually cites two conclusions that are actually measurable. 
Bad Theory!

Did you miss the part that actual address consumption has changed?

Has anybody noticed increased route table growth driven by increased 
rate of ARIN smaller sized allocations? Which would not happen all by 
itself, or spurred by market activity growth?

Or are those the inconvenient facts that does not line up with your 
theories?

I feel really bad for these organizations who have more addresses then 
everybody else combined and yet manage to charge 15USD for a block of 5 
addresses.

Where are they getting those addresses to do that with? They must need 
more. Give them a 12 month supply..

Joe