Re: Not Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

[bzs () theworld com]

Personally I'd rather hear from the RIRs regarding the value or not of
making more IPv4 space such as 240/4 available. They're on the front
lines of this.

I think sometimes what we're manipulating in these debates is the time
factor: Someone with a worthy, immediate, urgent need versus some
distant horizon which might be preferable in the big picture but is
demanding possibly unreasonable sacrifices of some in the short term.

I don't believe we are pondering making this IPv4 space available and
then returning to the 1980s/1990s relative free-for-all.

This all might be more interesting if driven by consideration of those
needs.

On March 13, 2022 at 13:54 johnl () iecc com (John Levine) wrote:
> It appears that Joe Maimon <jmaimon () jmaimon com> said:
> > Saku Ytti wrote:
> > > What if many/most large CDN, cloud, tier1 would commonly announce a 
> > > plan to drop all IPv4 at their edge 20 years from now? How would that 
> > > change our work? What would we stop doing and what would we start doing? 
> >
> > I cant see how it would change or do anything IPv6-related for myself 
> > for at least 19 years. And I suspect most others would fall somewhere 
> > between that and never.
>
> Yet the four largest cable networks and all of the mobile networks in the
> US have had full IPv6 support for years as do AWS, Google, Azure, Digital
> Ocean, Linode, and many other hosting providers.
>
> Could you explain what "most" means where you are?
>
> R's,
> John

-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs () TheWorld com             | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD       | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*