On Mar 5, 2010, at 1:21 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> The interesting question is at what point _can_ you do what you want without >> IPv4. It seems obvious that that point will be after the IPv4 free pool is >> exhausted, and as such, allocated-but-not-efficiently-used addresses will >> likely become worth the effort to reclaim. >> > Ah, but, that assumes that the need is located in a similar part of the > network > to the reclamation, or, that the point of reclamation can be sufficiently > motivated > to do so by the money offered by the point of need.
Actually, no, not really. When you're dying of thirst, even muddy water can be mighty appealing. The fact that some prefixes you obtain may be filtered because they're too short merely means you have additional costs to reach the sites you care about. Don't know many ISPs that guarantee universal connectivity outside their own network today. Not sure why that would change in the future. > I suspect the organizations that have excess space and know where it is are > likely to hold onto it as a hedge against their future needs, or, try to > extract > a very high market premium for it. Such folks will also have to take into consideration opportunity cost. Or they could make the strategic decision that all they really need is one or two ISP-provided public IPv4 addresses (in addition to IPv6) for their NATv4 box and public servers is all they really need and lease to their ISP the blocks they currently have in exchange for free connectivity or whatever. Etc. Myriad of possibilities. The point is that when the IPv4 free pool is exhausted, there will be disruptive change. It isn't clear to me that pretty much any of the existing policies or practices regarding IPv4 addressing will continue to apply. I've been disappointed that some folks in the RIR communities have been unable to understand this. Gave up arguing as I figure time will tell one way or the other. Regards, -drc
