Re: Suggestion: charging for IPv4 space

my reply inline below

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nick Hilliard" <[email protected]>
To: "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: [GLOBAL-V6] Suggestion: charging for IPv4 space


[...]

> Your suggestion boils down to: let's create a tax on IPv4 to help introduce
> IPv6.  In other words, you are creating an invented demand proposition, and
> we all know how well those work in practice (cf. the ISO protocol debacle).
>  You're also suggesting that a non-governmental body engage in the process
> of tax collection, and we also know how well that works in practice (cf.
> the InterNIC $50pa domain name debacle).
>

I agree and that's why I am proposing a study of this. If we can study this and find the
best solution, we can learn from previous mistakes & debacles.

> The doom that you are talking about will happen, and that is a good thing.
>
> It is a good thing because the only way to get people to change from IPv4
> to IPv6 is to let them feel the pain of running their IPv4 services on
> empty for long enough.  I've been in ISPs where they have lived in
> self-imposed NAT worlds with static addressing.  They changed to public
> addressing purely for business reasons.  The same will happen for ipv4 and
> ipv6.

Pain is not good, especially when it makes users unhappy.

My biggest concern is actually not the rising costs spiralling out of control. It is not
the abruptness with which we'll have to switch from v4 to v6. No, my biggest concern is
that the self-governance model which has been set-up so far and which, in my opinion, is
the most democratic bottom up of models on offer, perhaps not perfect, but improving year
on year, with hundreds, no, actually thousands of individuals like you and I having a
voice about the Internet's future, reduced to NIL.

The whole system, ICANN, RIRs etc. has been structured and has progressed naturally in a
way to make the Internet as stable as possible. The flipside of the coin is that it is not
well geared for rapid change. Each and every process requires consensus, something that
takes time; something that explores many avenues; something that requires discussion &
meeting people and convincing. The system's greatest asset is actually its greatest
liability with regards to IPv6.
If enough stakeholders are fed-up with the inability of the current system to rise to the
challenge of providing enough addressing to keep the "Internet for everyone", we are
likely to see a scenario that's completely different.

Because I have experienced the alternative system first-hand, I really hope that we will
not be put in this position.
Their track record speaks for itself:

- the people that brought you X400 email. Nightmare No.1. I remember pulling my hair out
when using it, and yet...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X.400

- the people who are pushing for another Alternative root for "The Internet of things"
http://www.muniwireless.com/2008/10/09/europe-seeks-to-promote-the-internet-of-things/

- the people who promoted the HADOPI law
http://www.isoc-ecc.org/docs/ipr2008/Press_Release_5sept08_ISOC.pdf

- The people in the USG who think that... well you know already
- The people in the Telcos who are reminiscent of the good old days of plain old telephone
service and how you could "rape" a client charging any amount for a low quality phone call
etc.

I am not saying that they are all bad, but I am saying that their track record is such
that some elements in those organisations might make the wrong choice due to their lack of
understanding in the matter.
There are plenty of stakeholders waiting in the sidelines, hoping that the whole
self-governance model will fail. Trust me, they will use *any* ammo they can, and IPv4 to
v6 transition pain is something they'll *love* to make use of.

Warmest regards,

Olivier

-- 
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D
Global Information Highway Ltd
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html


_______________________________________________
global-v6 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6