[arin-ppml] quantitative study of IPv4 address market

[Steven Ryerse]

Is it this community's charter to pass judgment on how any organization chooses to run their business - if they don't cause technical problems for the rest of this community?   Seems to me Microsoft or whoever is "facilitating the advancement of the Internet", even if they choose to be greedy for their owners or shareholders in the process.  

Steven L Ryerse
President
100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA  30338
770.656.1460 - Cell
770.399.9099 - Office
770.392-0076 - Fax

℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.
                     Conquering Complex Networks℠


-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Vixie [mailto:paul at redbarn.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 11:12 PM
To: Jimmy Hess
Cc: Steven Ryerse; Owen DeLong; arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] quantitative study of IPv4 address market

to me the most significant fact in all of this is that well capitalized organizations do not act as if, in any way, there was an impending ipv4 exhaustion event, or even a shortage. they are by and large not treating
ipv6 as though it was an imminent necessity. they know they can get ipv6 and run dual stack or translators for it at any time. their panic is limited to laying in a long term supply of ipv4 because they will need one or more half-decades to turn ship. they imagine, dimly if at all, that less well capitalized enterprises will move first their growth and then eventually their installed base to ipv6 but will not lose the ability to reach ipv4 -- ever. in this view, 2**32 addresses will go to the highest bidder, except for the dribs and drabs needed for "the 99%"
to use various kinds of NAT or address translation.

i am appalled. this is the same attitude that melts polar ice caps.

paul