[address-policy-wg] [Ticket#2012110601002595] Status of /24 PI IPv4 from last /8

On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote:

> Unlike the landrush in the US we *do* have an alternative, and do not need
> to find ways to make IPv4 last forever.

If anything, allowing IPv4 PI at this stage will speed up IPv4
exhaustion, not slow it down. I don't see this as trying to make it
last longer; the reverse is true.

There are valid business cases to be made today that include getting
IPv4 as long as it's available. Yes, unless they include IPv6 in their
business plans they are going to get hurt Real Soon Now (tm), but
that's outside of the scope of this argument.

The _only_ thing we should be discussing in this particular context is
"should we still hand out IPv4 PI as long as IPv4 is still available
or should we hand out IPv4 PA, only?"

Possible answers include:

* Stop handing out IPv4 PI once we reach the last /8
* Stop handing out IPv4 PI once we reach the last /x (12? 16?)
* Hand out IPv4 PI from a designated /x in the last /8, stop once that's empty
* Hand out IPv4 PI from returned space, only. Don't hand out PI from the last /8

And I am sure there are others.


It's painfully obvious that the argument that IPv6 is the way of the
future is correct.

It's also obvious, to me, that this fact is detached from the question
of how the remaining bits and pieces of IPv4 should be used up.



To put it differently: Why does anyone who considers IPv4 legacy care
about how it's used up?


-- 
Richard