3 ms·

What if we started charging a small but slowly increasing annual fee for each IPv4 address? And with the proceeds ICANN starts buying back IPv4 blocks and perma

by csears 8y ago

What if we started charging a small but slowly increasing annual fee for each IPv4 address? And with the proceeds ICANN starts buying back IPv4 blocks and permanently retiring them.

geofft 8y ago
This article is largely about IPv6 in internal networks, not IPv6 in the internet as a whole - as they say, "No one uses IPv6 only. All public network operators, and nearly all private ones, must offer full compatibility with all other network operators and as many end points and applications as possible." Their three choices are about remaining on IPv4 only, running dual-stack IPv4 and IPv6, and using a translation layer to run IPv6-only internally and convert to IPv4 at the border. All of them involve public IPv4 addressing, and the assumption is that the internet will forever be IPv4. So this means two things. The first is that the desire to move to IPv6 on the part of the article's authors has nothing to do with public IPv4 address space exhaustion, it's based on other alleged inherent benefits of IPv6. The second is that IPv4 NAT already solves the exhaustion problem - you're either doing NAT to IPv4 or NAT to IPv6 (using your favorite 6preposition4 encoding/tunneling scheme), but as far as the public internet is concerned, it looks like you're doing plain old IPv4 NAT.
orev 8y ago
That might actually have the opposite effect of what is desired. Whoever is charging and benefiting from the fee would then have an incentive to maintain the status quo of IPv4 and continue collecting the fees. We’re already seeing this now as people are selling IPv4 addresses. Scarcity + demand creates market opportunities.
- coding123 8y ago
  Couldn't they can mandate, that no customer must be charged MORE than the global fee, and violations instantly lose their ipv4 addresses (or rather replaced with v6)? I don't know who the ultimate benefactor would be - would it be ICANN?
  - richardwhiuk 8y ago
    In what jurisdiction do you envisage that law and why would the politicians agree to such a tax?

by csears 8y ago

What if we started charging a small but slowly increasing annual fee for each IPv4 address? And with the proceeds ICANN starts buying back IPv4 blocks and permanently retiring them.

geofft 8y ago

This article is largely about IPv6 in internal networks, not IPv6 in the internet as a whole - as they say, "No one uses IPv6 only. All public network operators, and nearly all private ones, must offer full compatibility with all other network operators and as many end points and applications as possible." Their three choices are about remaining on IPv4 only, running dual-stack IPv4 and IPv6, and using a translation layer to run IPv6-only internally and convert to IPv4 at the border. All of them involve public IPv4 addressing, and the assumption is that the internet will forever be IPv4. So this means two things. The first is that the desire to move to IPv6 on the part of the article's authors has nothing to do with public IPv4 address space exhaustion, it's based on other alleged inherent benefits of IPv6. The second is that IPv4 NAT already solves the exhaustion problem - you're either doing NAT to IPv4 or NAT to IPv6 (using your favorite 6preposition4 encoding/tunneling scheme), but as far as the public internet is concerned, it looks like you're doing plain old IPv4 NAT.

orev 8y ago

That might actually have the opposite effect of what is desired. Whoever is charging and benefiting from the fee would then have an incentive to maintain the status quo of IPv4 and continue collecting the fees. We’re already seeing this now as people are selling IPv4 addresses. Scarcity + demand creates market opportunities.

coding123 8y ago
Couldn't they can mandate, that no customer must be charged MORE than the global fee, and violations instantly lose their ipv4 addresses (or rather replaced with v6)? I don't know who the ultimate benefactor would be - would it be ICANN?
- richardwhiuk 8y ago
  In what jurisdiction do you envisage that law and why would the politicians agree to such a tax?