Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

[Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org>]

Matthew Petach wrote on 11/01/2024 21:05:
> I think that's a bit of an unfair categorization--we can't look at 
> pre-exhaustion demand numbers and extrapolate to post-exhaustion 
> allocations, given the difference in allocation policies pre-exhaustion 
> versus post-exhaustion.

Matt,

the demand for publicly-routable ipv4 addresses would be comparable to 
before, with the additional pressure of several years of pent-up demand.

You're right to say that allocation policies could be different, but we 
had discussions about run-out policies in each RIR area in the late 
2000s and each RIR community settled on particular sets of policies. I 
don't see that if an additional set of ipv4 address blocks were to fall 
out of the sky, that any future run-out policies would be much different 
to what we had before.

So 240/4 might last a month, or a year, or two, or be different in each 
RIR service area, but it's not going to change anything fundamental 
here, or permanently move the dial: ipv4 will still be a scarce resource 
afterwards.

Nick