Re: [ga] The best IPvX deal ever ?

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Interesting proposition.  I would ask if the NRO has
discussed the issue or has adopted a position on this
matter?

--- JFC Morfin <jefsey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> A proposition has been made (San Juan, Sebastien
> Bachollet) which 
> starts being discussed in diplomatic circles and I
> would like to see 
> commented by GA Members. This proposition is
> generous, responsible, 
> feasible, of common interest, but may have some
> objections. This 
> proposition is that USA and Europe give the pool of
> their remaining 
> IPv4 addresses to the other RIRs and start by force
> to only allocate 
> IPv6 addresses, while decreasing the address
> shortage urgency for 
> less developped areas until they can plan to benefit
> from the 
> acquired experience and most probable industrial
> cost reductions.
> 
> This would probably call for one year or two for
> this to be 
> formalized, permitting to inform American and
> European users and ISPs 
> and implement solutions under an equal opportunity
> and technical 
> pressure basis. For once third world countries would
> not pay for the 
> cost of the developed countries innovation. Also
> developed countries 
> would be used as test beds, permitting market
> stabilized IPv6 
> solutions to further deploy in other areas at lower
> cost. It could 
> also reduce the cost of the technical transition,
> due to a clear 
> market transition.
> 
> The current ROAP debate at IETF/IAB shows that IPv6
> is not yet fully 
> stabilized, this means that there would be no real
> advantage to USA 
> and Europe during the transition period, while the
> other areas would 
> stay with (for now) cheaper IPv4 systems, until IPv6
> can become 
> cheaper in their turn. The attention this
> proposition would receive 
> by Governments could also help to finance some R&D
> along the RFC 3869 
> lines (call from IAB for non-commercial R&D
> financial sponsoring).
> 
> The impact on users could be tremendous as
> individual host (home, 
> mobile, hosting services), and myriads of possible
> domain name 
> extensions (including semantic addressing) could
> bluntly develop.
> 
> This would also restart the debate on the namespace
> (DNS, IPv4 and 
> IPv6) ownership, and possibly help getting a better
> perspective of 
> what ICANN should really do to protect itself (how
> an obsolete or 
> inadequate ICANN can really protect the
> registrants).
> jfc
> 
> 
> 



       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
http://sims.yahoo.com/