[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2019-19: Require IPv6 Before Receiving Section 8 IPv4 Transfers

[John Curran]

On 6 Nov 2019, at 3:58 PM, Michel Py <michel at arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us<mailto:michel at arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us>> wrote:

John Curran wrote :
you might find it difficult to argue that you wish the benefits of
cooperation minus whatever obligations that community collectively establishes.

You might find difficult to explain to your members the legal costs associated with pursuing a crusade that has failed for the last 20 years.

Michel -

ARIN will enforce the right of the community to establish policy and its ability to administer the registry in accordance with that policy, and that includes taking all legal measures necessary for defense.)

(We have specific reserves available for the legal defense of such basic principles of the registry system, and a proven record of success in this regard...)

IPv6 has failed to deploy for twenty years. Open your eyes.

That’s a point that you’ll need to prove to the community, if indeed you wish it to be considered in the development of policy.

(Note that it might be challenging to make that particular point, since IPv4 runout in the ARIN region only occurred in 2015, so the applicable time scale is actually quite short, not twenty years.  Furthermore, the actual deployment is quite robust, with the growing part of the Internet [mobile] being heavily based on IPv4 - “In some countries, major mobile networks are driving IPv6 adoption. In … the USA (Verizon Wireless – 84%, Sprint – 70%, T-Mobile USA – 93%, and AT&T Wireless – 57%) national mobile networks have very high levels of IPv6 deployment.”  <https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/2018/state-of-ipv6-deployment-2018/> )

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20191106/d18efd18/attachment.htm>