Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

[bmanning () vacation karoshi com]

On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 09:54:21AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:54 AM, TJ wrote:
>
> > > IPv6-only content won't be meaningful for years yet, and IPv6-only
> > > eyeballs will necessarily be given ways to reach v4 for many years
> > > to come.
> >
> >
> > To be fair - IPv6 only content may not exactly be commonplace, but there are
> > IPv6-only networks out there ... they just tend to consist of "things"
> > rather than "people".
> >
> > For the "surfable internet", the chicken-and-egg scenario continues - as
> > more services get reachable, it should create impetus for users - all dual
> > stack (hopefully) ... until a threshold is crossed, when it becomes more
> > feasible to be a general consumer who was IPv6-only (or really bad IPv4
> > alongside it).  I also think "for years" and "for many years" are very
> > relative terms :) ...
> >
> >
> > /TJ
>
> I think that the creation of consumers with IPv6-only or really bad IPv4
> along side it will result sooner than any threshold of IPv6-ready content
> is reached.  I think this will be the result of not having IPv4 addresses
> to give those consumers rather than the result of IPv6 deployment.
>
> Owen

        on the other side of the pond, the Euros are grappling with
        a desire to get actual utilization of assigned numbers into
        something above single digits.  They are shooting for 80%
        utilization of all assets before assigning any additional 
        numbers.

        this problem has been around for a -very- long time, predating 
        the RIRs by a couple of decades.  the gist is, virtually 
        -every- allocation/delegation exceeds the actual demand - sometimes
        by many orders of magnitude.

        in the IPv4 space, it was common to have a min allocation size of 
        a /20 ... or 4,096 addresses ... and yet this amnt of space was
        allocated to someone who only needed to address "3 servers"... say
        six total out of a pool of four thousand ninty six.  

        Thats a huge amnt of wasted space.  If our wise and pragmatic leaders
        (drc, jc, et.al.) are correct, then IPv4 will be around for a very
        long time.

        What, if any, plan exists to improve the utilization density of the
        existant IPv4 pool?  

--bill