On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:53 PM, George Bonser <gbonser@seven.com> wrote:
The first step will be a registrar saying "after this date, we will no longer issue any IPv4 addresses for whatever reason" and at the same time, getting very aggressive in reclaiming space from dead entities, hijackers, etc. As time goes by, the amount of v4 space being routed declines through natural attrition. It is a combination of liberal v6 assignment coupled with aggressive v4 reclamation.
Why on earth would a registrar aggressively reclaim space from entities if they're no longer issuing it back out? Are we planning on recommending policies into the ARIN AC that turn ARIN into an IPv4 space reclamation entity, to hoard up v4 addresses? As it now stands, the amount of v4 space being routed will trend towards the asymptote of maximal organizational utilization, and will *not* decline. Any organization that moves resources off v4 and frees up address space will either hold that space as an ongoing resource to be used for future expansions, or will sell it off on the transfer market for short-term cash infusions; the new holders, having paid good cash for it, will have a strong incentive to get it routed and carrying traffic as quickly as possible, to pay back their investment. There is *nothing* in the system driving towards a natural attrition of IPv4 usage, even after runout; we simply change the allocation model from purely needs based, to needs+cash based. Unless ISPs state that they will charge additional money to assign v4 addresses to customers, over what they charge to v6 customers, there is no real pressure in the marketplace for the amount of v4 routing to decline. So long as the end user sees the same cost, and same service for using v4 as v6, there is no pressure towards a v6-only world. So...uh...who's going to be first to step up and tell their customers "look, you get a v6 /56 for free with your account, but if you want v4 addresses, it's going to cost an extra $50/month." ?? Matt