[Chapter-delegates] scarcity of IPv4 addresses

[Franck Martin]

My understanding is that returning unused IPv4 would make us win weeks  
not years so may be too much efforts for little gain?

Toute connaissance est une réponse à une question

On 26/10/2008, at 7:57, "Chris Grundemann" <cgrundemann at gmail.com>  
wrote:

> As one more possible avenue for ISOC to pursue;  there was a recent  
> suggestion on the ARIN PPML by Tom Vest that we look into the idea  
> of a tax credit to organizations which return space to their RIR (http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2008-October/012386.html 
> ).  I think that at least in the US, it has a potential to help and  
> I wonder what others thoughts are?
> ~Chris
>
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy <isolatedn at gmail.com 
> > wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Franck Martin <franck at sopac.org>  
> wrote:
>
> > What would you and others suggest ISOC should do to save the  
> titanic?
>
> Hello Frank Martin, John Schnizlein,
>
> 1. Focus on promoting migration to IPV6 rather than worry to much
> about the IPV4 Legacy? The more ICANN and the RIRs fret over the hard,
> unpleasant decisions that need to be taken on IPV4, greater would be
> the time taken to transition to IPV6.  Some breathing space is indeed
> required, but the extent of importance given to managing IPV4
> resources appear to be in the order of extending the life span of the
> IPV4 Legacy. What ISOC could do is to encourage hard, tough decisions
> and make it swift. The address spaces were allocated almost for free,
> at a throwaway price, and now they are dear. Any thing scarce brings
> in a lot of value. The businesses are bound to resist the idea of
> letting them all go exactly at this opportunistic moment.  So, remind
> everyone that these are relatively 'free" assets and make all the
> tough decisions that are necessary on the issues of recalling unused
> addresses or on allowing/ disallowing transfers.  ( At the same time,
> some consideration needs to given to the inexplicable aspects in
> business - these "assets" might have been acquired at a negligible
> cost, but around these allocations businesses are bound to have
> invested a considerably, so the "accumulated" cost of these assets
> would in reality be a lot more than initially paid for.  If ICANN as
> many cents as collected on allocation, it might square up ICANN's
> books, but might not be the same case with businesses. )
>
> 2. Declare War. It requires war like measures to cause IPV6 adopted
> before it is too late.
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 1:27 AM, John Schnizlein  
> <schnizlein at isoc.org> wrote:
>
> > Yes, price speculation is possible in an unregulated market for  
> IPv4 address
> > blocks. This speculation could, as your doubt suggests, increase  
> volatility in such
> > a market.
>
> Should we be complacent at this threat of speculative trade in the
> names and numbers space?  Speculation has done enough harm to the
> World Economy, shouldn't the Internet be kept away from such trade
> practices ?
>
> Perhaps ICANN could make it mandatory that transfers are routed  
> through RIRs.
>
> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
> ISOC India Chennai.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
>
>
> -- 
> Chris Grundemann
> www.chrisgrundemann.com
> www.linkedin.com/in/cgrundemann
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20081026/cce94a1d/attachment.htm>