??: [AfriNIC-rpd] What is our take on the central pool IPv4exhaustion?

[Philip Smith]

Hi Hytham,

Hytham EL Nakhal said the following on 2/9/07 08:23:
>
> What about 2 /8 for each RIR ?

I feel that the only workable solution globally is N=0.

N > 0 simply means that developing regions of the Internet suffer more
than the developed regions of the Internet:

- less motivation to deploy IPv6
- contradicts AfriNIC's active campaign of awareness of IPv6
- become left behind in technology progress
- N=5 at AfriNIC usage rates reserves more than 10 years of IPv4
- encourages RIR shopping
- no access to content which will inevitably become more and more
available on IPv6
- greater targets for commercial transfers of IPv4 space (whether
permissible or not) - who can resist the allure of dollars from wealthy
developed country service providers?
- brings forward the run-out for APNIC, ARIN and RIPE NCC regions

N=1 as proposed by JPNIC might be more feasible, but my concern is that
pool will become a lawyers' gold mine. Definitions of "critical" or
"deserving" cases are different in everyone's eyes, and will end up
being well defined by lawyers and the deepness of their clients'
wallets. And the RIRs would have to bear the financial impact of
defending the legal cases - money from their LIRs' membership fees. Or
they will choose not to contest claims, in which case IP address
allocations out of the N=1 pool will be managed by lawyers, not ISPs or
the RIRs.

As I've said before, we should let these very well intentioned proposals
die, and concentrate on figuring out where the Internet goes from 2010
onwards.

philip
--