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

[Michel Py]

> Owen DeLong wrote :
> I’m sure someone will go into the business of announcing IPv6 prefixes for, say, $10/month.
> For an organization transferring in an IPv4 block, another $120/year is probably cheaper
> than pushing the IT department to adequately deploy IPv6 to any meaningful level.

You bet it is cheaper. A thousand times. If I ever have to announce an IPv6 prefix, that's the kind of job I would give to a summer intern, except that for 10 bucks a month I want my interns to do something meaningful, not to save me 10 bucks a month. The kind of job I would give to an intern would be to move my IPv4 resources to a wholly owned subsidiary in another RIR.

Reality check : never heard of jobs leaving the US to go overseas because the business environment there is better ?
You want that to happen for registration services too ? RPKI in any other RIR works much better, too.
Besides exercising all the options on the table including legal ones, I will also shop for another RIR if it comes to that.


> I’ve long said that the primary driver to enterprise adoption will most
> likely be when their employees stop having IPv4 by default at home.

A good argument, but it does not hold. VPN usage is decreasing; these days, everything is over https that translates well over any kind of NAT you can invent.
Besides, it is a double-edged sword as much as everything else. For the hot shots, we already require that they have a static IP at home and we provide them with a company-approved CPE. We will pay for the $15/mo per IP we already are. My ISP is screwing me $15/mo for a DHCP reservation that cost them nothing but 5 minutes one-time, that is $180/year. I can pay that on my own money. Remember : I once had my very own ASN at home, that I gladly paid $500 setup then $100 a year to ARIN.

We have multiple cases where the employee as two ISPs : one for home and family that they pay for, and one for the office that we pay for. It is cheaper to pay for a second ISP than to secure some crazy configuration with multiples VLANs and multiple SSIDs on one ISP.

I have said it multiple times and I am getting tired to repeat myself : each attempt to pursue this unreachable dream of 100% IPv6 will result in the balkanization of the Internet. And the IPv4 camps welcomes it.

Tone it down. 20 years of FUD have failed; every day that passes diminishes your credibility as a policy maker.

Flash news : there is this thing called the ubiquitous Internet. That is, the ubiquitous IPv4 Internet.
I am tired of warnings. The goal of a IPv6 ubiquitous Internet has failed for 20 years in a row, there is a point when people will have to make the call if you are with them or if you are against them.

Remember that day I presented right after you at LSPE ? was 6 years ago. You thought I was full of it.
6 years after that, where are you ? still nowhere. I told you so. The enterprise IPv4-only Internet will survive no matter what you have to say about it.

The enterprise market will not adopt IPv6. If it takes splitting ARIN in two, so be it.
Frankly at this time I would welcome it. IPv6 is only trouble for me, and I do not think ARIN is representing my interests.

It has been 20 years, and I still am in the 90% of enterprise customers who are not going to do anything about IPv6 for the next 10 years.

Tone it down.

Michel.