[address-policy-wg] 2019-02 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IPv4 Allocations to a /24)

On Fri, 8 Feb 2019, Daniel Suchy wrote:

> Hello,

Hello again,


> On 2/8/19 9:15 AM, Carlos Friaças via address-policy-wg wrote:
>>> I think only one reason, which will really boost IPv6 adoption is real
>>> exhaustion of IPv4 pool within our (RIPE) region.
>> I also would like to see a stronger IPv6 adoption, and reach the point
>> where IPv6 packets become dominant (i.e. >50%) and at a later stage
>> reach a point where IPv4 routers/services/everything could be
>> disconnected because they weren't useful anymore.
>
> Since there're happy-eyeball RFC implementations, it's somewhat harder
> to perform such measurments. But I think IPv6 adoption was boosted in
> regions, where IPv4 pool dried.

It's difficult to measure accurately, and even harder to establish a 
cause/effect link from IPv4 dried pools. :-(

Google is currently measuring (globally) around 25%, from 15% 2 years ago, 
and from 5% 4 years ago. I also read that as a "boost", yes :-) But 
unfortunately it's still a bit away from 50%... and we must not forget 
that Google is only one (big) content provider. There is still a lot of 
IPv4-only content around, and access to it naturally measures at 0%.


>>> 2019-02 proposal is just delay this (and allowing more newcomers to
>>> start their bussiness), nothing else.
>> The core purpose of 2019-02 is to allow (more) newcomers to access a
>> tiny bit of IPv4 address space so their (hopefully IPv6-enabled)
>> infrastructure will have path to the IPv4-only world (without going to
>> the market).
>
> Yes, I understand this purpose and to be clear - I'm not against this
> proposal (that means, I support it). /24 allocations for newcomers are
> also used within ARIN region (since 2015 depletetion), so this cannot be
> any problem with such limitation within our (RIPE) region.

Thank You!


Regards,
Carlos


> - Daniel
>