[arin-ppml] The annual limit on total maintenance fees for legacy number resources under the ARIN fee schedule

[Joe Maimon]

hostmaster at uneedus.com wrote:
> .
>
> If we could just get the total a bit higher, we might reach a tipping
> point that would drive universal IPv6 adoption.  However I do believe
> that there are forces that are actively working against IPv6 adoption,
> because it is a threat to their internet dominance, as well as the
> money these players have poured into buying IPv4 space.
>
> Widespread adoption of IPv6 WILL crash the value of those IPv4
> investments.  What is good for the community, which is a universal
> network with plenty of address space available to everyone goes
> against the position of others that would like to turn the internet
> back into a one way service like Compuserve or AOL.
>

I dont think we have to go to the malevolent and nebulous for answers 
when the mundane and rational suffice well enough.

IPv6 cost benefit analysis is not weighted very highly towards IPv6 for 
far too many, for far too long, even with altruism factored in. Its a 
wonder its gotten this far.

I dont believe the behavior and logic pattern you are describing can 
possibly be common enough or a large enough motivating factor to be 
worthy of any real world focus. At best a handful of inconsequential 
folk may have indulged in some fantasy musing over it before reality 
asserted itself.

For instance, this motivation requires a great deal of hard to picture 
high level coordination to maximize its success, or otherwise its a 
wager that can leave you on the losing side of a tipping point.

As a result, you would have to perform an entire IPv6 deployment that 
was flag day light switch ready to guard against that outcome. And then 
leave it off, waiting and bit-rotting while your evil plans slowly 
matured into fruition -- maybe. So all the costs, none of the gain, all 
the risks, slight potential of some short term reward eventually.

Yeah, no.

Joe