[address-policy-wg] common sense and 2013-03

On 25 Mar 2013, at 09:22, Tore Anderson <tore at fud.no> wrote:

> So to be honest, I don't find the argument that some LIRs will just go
> and buy lots of IPv4 address space they don't need "just because they
> can" particularly sound. Common sense tells me that if they have no
> actual need for IPv4 addresses, they won't be spending money on them either.

+1. Though as my gran used to say "common sense: it isn't so common".

I fear we're in danger of rat-holing and trying to over-engineer 2013-03. It's all very well for the proposal to enumerate every hypothetical scenario and threat. But what good does that actually do? An in-depth discussion of this proposal is like having a debate on the Titanic some time after the ship has hit the iceberg about which wines would be the best match for our dinner choices.

The whole point is our policy-making machinery should be responsive and quick. So if 2013-03 later turns out to be unsatisfactory -- for some definition of unsatisfactory -- we change  or replace it in light of the information available at that time.

BTW, common sense flies out the window whenever there is a (perceived) market scarcity. [Back in the 1970s there was panic buying of salt in the UK because of a word of mouth rumour about "the workers going on strike in the Siberian salt mines".] If there's the equivalent of panic buying of the last dregs of v4, so what? Once it's gone, it's gone and then we can all get on with what we should be doing: deploying IPv6. No amount of policy making today is going to prevent panic buying or other irrational behaviour by those who see (or think they see) empty IPv4 shelves in the shops.