Re: RIPE our of IPv4

[Matthew Kaufman <matthew () matthew at>]

I administer two networks that use legacy IPv4 blocks (one also uses an
allocation from the 44 net)

Both could have IPv6 if it was free, but neither organization has the funds
to waste on a paid IPv6 allocation.

We should have given every legacy block matching free IPv6 space, because
early adopters are still sometimes early adopters.

But you’re right, what could have been supported on a volunteer basis is
now a profit center. Especially for IPv6, which is once-and-done if sized
properly.

Matthew Kaufman

On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 2:29 PM <bzs () theworld com> wrote:

> If the commitment really was to spread IPv6 far and wide IPv6 blocks
> would be handed out for free, one per qualified customer (e.g., if you
> have an IPv4 allocation you get one IPv6 block free), or perhaps some
> trivial administrative fee like $10 per year.
>
> But the RIRs can't live on that.
>
> We have put them under the management of a group of five organizations
> which are very dependent on the income from block allocations and no
> doubt were hoping IPv6 allocations would be a boon since there will be
> very little if any income growth from future IPv4 block allocations.
>
> Worse, once acquired an IPv6 block has so many billions of addresses
> very few if any would ever need another allocation so it would hardly
> act as a loss leader.
>
> I realize many still would not deploy IPv6 for various reasons such as
> their equipment doesn't support it or they don't have the in-house
> expertise to support it, etc tho I can't think of much other etc, a
> few points of resistance do come up.
>
> --
>         -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*