Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

[John Payne <john () sackheads org>]

On Apr 8, 2010, at 5:14 PM, William Herrin wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 4:51 PM, John Payne <john () sackheads org> wrote:
> > On Apr 8, 2010, at 4:44 PM, William Herrin <bill () herrin us> wrote:
> > > I think you'll find that the guy deploying the IPv6-only client -or-
> > > server is going to be in the minority for a long time to come. But if
> > > you want to bet against me, more power to you.
> >
> > I hope you're right, but you put up the scenario of me being unable to get a
> > v4 address. I suspect I won't be the first there, and I hope that by the
> > time that is an issue for me, I will be in the majority already :)
>
> John,
>
> You'll be able to get another v4 address. It'll cost you noticeably
> more than it does now, but you'll be able to afford it. Thing is, if
> you induce me and others to deploy IPv6 now, you may not have to get
> another v4 address then, nor pay for it. So if there's a way you can
> induce me to deploy IPv6 now that doesn't cost you any money now or
> later, well, that's ultimately money that stays in your pocket.

a) if I don't have to get an IPv4 address then Ill be standing up a v6 only server, by which time, again, I hope to be 
in the majority :)
b) ARIN or RIRv6 has costs that are covered by registration fees.  How does having a whole bunch of freeloaders save me 
money?  Doesn't it increase my share of the costs?  Doesn't giving you free IPv6 now continue my costs into perpetuity 
whereas just ignoring you may add some operational cost until you're either in an insignificant percentage or you give 
up and start playing by the same rules as everyone else?

> Keeps money in my pocket too since I'll have the same problem, but
> what do you care about that? It's your money that matters, not mine.
>
> Inducing behavior that ultimately reduces everybody's cost "serves the
> public interest." That's what organizations like ARIN are for: serving
> the public interest.

But I don't agree that giving you a free ride reduces everyone's costs.  In fact, I think it increases everyone else's 
costs.

This comes on top of my annual reading of the distribution of the US tax burden.... there are some parallels to be 
drawn in terms of fairness.