On Mar 8, 2010, at 12:08 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote:

>> From: Tony Li <tony...@tony.li>
>> IPv4 is done. Over. Cooked. Fully toast. It will either enter a black
>> market where we deaggregate and no proposal will help, or we shift to
>> v6 and v4 is irrelevant. In either case, we're not in time to do
>> anything significant for v4. 
> Probably needless to say, I do not agree with this. There are _definitely_
> more options than DeathI and DeathII.
>     Noel

There is also DeathIII, i.e., we shift to v6 (or something else), but through 
some series of steps that preserves IPv4 in place as a critical, 
non-substitutable input for provisioning routing services. If that happens, 
black market-driven deaggregation would not be inevitable. However, any other 
outcome would likely arise from and/or push IPv4 and incumbent IPv4-based 
operators into assuming the same sort of (economic) roles that have been 
traditionally associated with physical "last mile" facilities and their 
owner-operators... which would ultimately drive every other aspiring new 
routing service provider thereafter into the same sort of (basically, 
adversarial) position with the same sort of bypass-centric goals that were/are 
commonly attributed to non-incumbent Internet service providers, esp. back in 
the 1980-1990s. 

What other potential options do you envision which might provide some 
reasonable probability of avoiding this Catch-22?

rrg mailing list

Reply via email to