[address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)

> Adrian,
>
> from my PoV we could start to debate you argument:
>
> On 15.04.2016 11:02, Adrian Pitulac wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> The discussion regarding the last /8 policy benefit can be long, but
>> from statistics and from my point of view, ARIN depletion of pools,
>> resulted directly in IPV6 growth. Everyone talks about why RIPE IPv6
>> hasn't exploded. I think the reason is IPv4 pools still available. If
>> market will be constrained by lack of IPv4 pools then IPv6 will explode.
> if there aren't *ANY* 2nd market IPv4 brokers operating in the ARIN
> region *AT ALL*.
>
> Which AFAIK is not the case.
>
> So fulfilling IPv4 address space needs in the North American region
> should be, give or take, as cheap or expensive, as easy or complicated
> as anywhere else.
>
> So this effect might only be very loosely coupled at best.
>
> How about assuming that the US, North America in general, is simply
> again leading the pack in eventually deploying a not-so-new-any-longer
> technology? They have done this already in the past, so I have heart. ;-)
>
> Best,
>
> 	-C.

Even though US/NorthAmerica is again leading the pack deploying IPv6, 
they had an incentive in IPv4 depletion.

On our side, entities do whatever tricks (ex: creating multiple LIR's, 
even in different countries), to gain access to more IPv4 resources in 
any way possible.

Having a condition like 3 star IPv6 RIPEness to be able to get another 
IPv4 block each 18 months will provide enough thrust to small entities 
to enable IPv6 in their networks and this way doing investments also. 
They will start providing IPv6 services and this way we'll see an 
objective accomplishment.

So, I'm convinced that this policy will fuel IPv6 implementation at a 
certain level.