Re: IPv6 will never fly: ARIN continues to kill it

On 20-sep-2007, at 18:33, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

> > > the RIRs will  consider deprecating PI.
> > And that would be the same kind of consideration that has gone   
> > towards "deprecating" the holding of nearly 0.5% of the total  
> > IPv4  address space by a single organization? Despite the fact that
> > we're quickly running out of available IPv4 space and the number
> > of organizations involved is less than 50, visible efforts have yet
> > to materialize.
> ARIN's counsel has told ARIN that it is unclear if they have legal  
> standing to revoke legacy assignments.
First of all, litigation isn't the only way to get something done,  
and second, do don't know that until you try. We did see 46/8 come  
back earlier this year, but unless I'm mistaken, that was the first  
legacy /8 to be returned this century.
> And, for the record, there are over 50,000 of them, not less than 50.
50000 organizations holding nearly 0.5% of the IPv4 space each? I'm  
impressed! With that kind of address compression technology we don't  
need IPv6 after all.
> Also, projections show that even if we reclaimed _every_ legacy  
> assignment (many of which are still in use and even justified under  
> current policy), it would only delay exhaustion six months to a  
> year; it is felt that doing so is not generally worth the effort  
> and would certainly cost an absurd amount in legal fees, and the  
> litigation is likely to last beyond the exhaustion date anyways  
> (with no solid guess as to who would win in the end).
I mostly agree with that, but a few years ago it looked like  
reclaiming, say, half of the legacy /8s would buy us 2 - 5 extra  
years of IPv4 lifetime and there was enough time to do it at that  
point. Same thing for repurposing 240/4, by the way.
> > So I doubt anything is going to happen once a few tens of
> > thousands of organizations have cast their IPv6 PI addresses in   
> > stone. Those prefixes will be around for a _long_ time.
> The situation is different with v6 because all PI assignments are  
> subject to a contract that allows ARIN to revoke them at any time  
> with a policy change. If a viable alternative emerged, ARIN could  
> stop making new PI assignments, deprecate the existing ones, and  
> drop them after a few years' transition period.
I don't believe that for one second. Maybe the RIRs have contracts  
with all new PI holders, but that doesn't automatically give ARIN the  
authority to reclaim address space after a policy change. I don't  
know of a precedent of any RIR EVER reclaiming ANY address space  
without the cooperation of the holder, despite the holder not  
complying with policies.
As a non-lawyer, I would judge the chances in court for reclaiming  
IPv4 /8s higher than those for reclaiming IPv6 PI space: in the first  
case, it's the benefit the continued operation of the IPv4 internet,  
in the latter case, it's going to look highly arbitrary.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf