[address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)

Hi,


On 6/9/2015 10:28 PM, Garry Glendown wrote:


>>>>  - help the last /8 pool become even larger
>>> Measures for IP space conservation have ensured availability of
>>> addresses over the last ~10 years - if sensible decisions about policies
>>> cause push the frame further than previous measures have, I'd say: Job
>>> well done! Hopefully, by the time the Internet disables IPv4 there are
>>> still IPv4 addresses available for assignment by RIRs ...
>> Here I can't agree but I also can't contradict you. There are opinions
>> that say if the perspective that IPv4 will really be exhausted it will
>> push ISPs to deploy IPv6 sooner. If you tell them that there will be
>> IPv4 resources for RIPE to give even in 10-20 years, then probably many
>> will say let's see if we live to that time and then we'll make a decision.
> OK, maybe we are getting somewhere: Apart from you contradicting
> yourself in part, you would consider IPv4 shortage to push v6
> deployment.

As I said, there are opinions that say the perspective of real IPv4
exhaustion would push IPv6 deployment. I don't have a maginifing glass
to make predictions, I have my opinion on that matter but I don't think
it's usefull to elaborate on that.

>> Let's not help the prices raise then. The demand for IPs is supported
>> by real needs as otherwise nobody would pay so much money for them. In
>> a free economy when you shorten the supply, prices will grow. If there
>> would have been a policy that would say let's get back the IPs from
>> those who don't use them, that would really help. 
> But we have a limited supply - if RIRs didn't put policies in place to
> reduce IP use, we would have already run out quite some time ago. Just
> by ignoring the fact that there is an IP shortage doesn't make it go away.

Again, my opinion is that we can learn by observing the effects of
previous policies.

I didn't want to get involved into discussing this policy as I noticed
everyone gets in all kind of details which don't get the problem solved.
I don't believe this policy is a usefull step in the right direction.

As I mentioned earlier there are no positive effects, it doesn't help
conserve the last /8 pool and there are no benefits to the community by
adopting it. That's what's important. All other discussions lead to
polemics that should be taken somewhere else. Maybe at the RIPE meetings.

Ciprian Nica
IP Broker Ltd.