[address-policy-wg] RE: The price of address space

TJ and all,

  I for one see IPv6 as an essential.  But it remains to be well received
as was originally hoped for reasons already stated even if those reasons
are short sighted.  But, IPv6 IMO is only one step in progression that
can be sidestepped with IPv8, which we have been steadily rolling out
for several years now ever so slowly but deliberately.  And of course
IPv8 is much easier to implement, requires no application modification,
and far cheaper than IPv6.  Yet we continue to believe and support
IPv6's eventual implementation even if for only to point up that it's
expense makes IPv8 far more attractive.

trejrco at gmail.com wrote:

> I continue to be amazed at statements like:
> "Today, it is not necessary to deploy IPv6 at all."
>
> So, you firmly believe that everyone deploying (or preparing to deploy) IPv6 today is ... What, wasting time?  Wrong?  Stupid?
>
> Or, perhaps just (way?) ahead of the curve?  As In not necessary now - but will be some day?
>
> Obviously, I continue to respectfully disagree it isn't needed - and am doing what I can to help environments get IPv6 deployed :).
>
> /TJ
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Masataka Ohta <mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
>
> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 06:33:32
> To: David Conrad<drc at virtualized.org>
> Cc: <michael.dillon at bt.com><michael.dillon at bt.com>; <address-policy-wg at ripe.net>
> Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] RE: The price of address space
>
> David Conrad wrote:
>
> > As the cost of IPv4 goes up, there will be increasing incentives to
> > make more efficient use of the address space.
>
> Technically speaking , so true.
>
> Today, it is not neccesary to deploy IPv6 at all.
>
> > People will consolidate
> > their address holdings, putting their allocated-but-unused IPv4  address
> > onto the market.  Since this is increasing the supply of  usable IPv4
> > addresses, this will tend to drive the price down.
>
> Not at all.
>
> Unless NICs reduce supply to a demand, enforcing the deployment of
> "more efficient use of the address space", LIRs will keep consuming
> the same amount of addresses, because, there is no economical
> drive for them to do otherwise and big economical drive to do so.
>
> That is, "more efficient use of the address space" may cost more
> and because "more efficient use of the address space" may be
> deployed after IPv4 addresses are exhausted, which means the LIRs
> can sell part of its address space, now not necessary for them,
> at very high price.
>
> > And you don't believe the anticipation of IPv6 deployment would have a
> > depressive effect on an IPv4 market?
>
> There would have been an effect, if most people had believed that
> IPv6 transition would have been completed long before IPv4 address
> exhaustion.
>
>                                                 Masataka Ohta

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln
"YES WE CAN!"  Barack ( Berry ) Obama

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
My Phone: 214-244-4827