[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2019-2: Waiting List Block Size Restriction

[Ronald F. Guilmette]

In message <Pine.LNX.4.64.1903021758430.3734 at localhost.localdomain>, 
theone at uneedus.com wrote:

>While you are right that I can have these many sites all on the same IP, 
>the amount of time I would have to spend on central management to do so is 
>grossly greater than the cost of the required customer IP addresses...

So basically, if the cost/benefit ratio were to change in the future,
in such a way as to make IPv4 addresses more costly or valuable, you
might possibly change the way that you currently utilize each one of
those that you have, and you might begin employing a more address-
efficient set of practices, yes?

My only observation is that this could be either a good thing or a bad
thing, depending on one's point of view.  For hosting companies reliant
on essentially unlimited supplies of cheap IPv4 addresses, it would
quite certainly be a bad thing to be enticed, by rising address costs,
to use less of them.  For others, inclduing any and all IPv6 cheerleaders,
it would probably be viewed as a good thing.

For anyone, such as myself, who is concerned primarily with abuse, any
and all encouragement, economic or otherwise, to convert each and every
IPv4 address either into "dead space" or into -legitimate- and well managed
DNS/SMTP/HTTP -servers- would be a profoundly good thing.


Regards,
rfg