On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 13:59, David Conrad <drc(_at_)virtualized(_dot_)org>
wrote:
Ron,
On Feb 9, 2012, at 12:40 PM, Ronald Bonica wrote:
At NANOG 54, ARIN reported that they are down to 5.6 /8s. If just four ISPs
ask for a /10 for CGN, we burn one of those /8s.
Is that really a good idea?
Long ago, I once proposed a policy at ARIN to try to extend the IPv4 runway.
One of the most common responses I received (including from several members
of ARIN's AC) was "let it run out naturally", with the rationale being either:
a) "it'll force people to move to IPv6"
b) "we spent a lot of money to prepare for IPv6 because we knew it was coming
soon, we don't want to give our competitors who fiddled the summer away more
time"
I suspect those people would answer "yes" (well, unless their opinions have
changed as reality starts biting).
Being one of the people who believe that IPv4 should run out
naturally, I can tell you that my answer is "no." Natural-run-out and
waste are not synonymous.
Cheers,
~Chris
Regards,
-drc
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
--
@ChrisGrundemann
weblog.chrisgrundemann.com
www.burningwiththebush.com
www.theIPv6experts.net
www.coisoc.org
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf