4 ms·

Putting a price on IPV4 would be great. Actual monetary incentive for people to finally make IPV6 work.

zapdrive 3y ago
And at the same time incentivise IPV4 horders to delay IPV6 adoption. Since biggest ISPs are also biggest IPV4 owners, they are not going to devalue their holdings until mandated by the government. Why is FCC not acting and forcing ISPs to adopt IPV6? All modern equipment manufactured in the last 15 years supports dual stack. I doubt there's a huge percentage of routers/switches currently running that are older than 15 years. There is practically zero reason to not have dual stack, other than the obvious anti-competitive practices.
- Sankozi 3y ago
  Are ISPs IP owners? I think they should be one of the main payers in this scheme. Question is who should get the money. Definitely not the companies currently having IP assigned.
- afiori 3y ago
  The only way to manage scarce bounded resources fairly is with georgist taxation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism
the_mitsuhiko 3y ago
Considering the uneven distribution of IPv4 addresses I have doubts that this would play out in a healthy way.
danpalmer 3y ago
There is already a price, which is often significant given the lack of supply. I've read about several ISPs moving to IPv6 explicitly due to cost, and mobile carriers are well known to use v6 only (with gateways) to grow their market.
DeathArrow 3y ago
What if people start hoarding IPv6 addresses, too and the price of an IPv6 address rises?
- sgjohnson 3y ago
  Currently IPv6 addresses cost exactly nothing. You can get them from your RIR. As many as you reasonably need.
- SAI_Peregrinus 3y ago
  There are too many IPv6 addresses for hoarding them to be a problem any time in the next few hundred thousand years, at least with the current deployment strategies. Currently it's recommended for ISPs to hand out a /32 to every ISP that requests one, and a /48 to every ISP customer (though residential ISPs will often only hand out /64s). But only the 2000::/3 IPv6 space is available, the remaining 7/8ths is reserved in case that allocation strategy is too liberal.

And at the same time incentivise IPV4 horders to delay IPV6 adoption. Since biggest ISPs are also biggest IPV4 owners, they are not going to devalue their holdings until mandated by the government. Why is FCC not acting and forcing ISPs to adopt IPV6? All modern equipment manufactured in the last 15 years supports dual stack. I doubt there's a huge percentage of routers/switches currently running that are older than 15 years. There is practically zero reason to not have dual stack, other than the obvious anti-competitive practices.

Sankozi 3y ago
Are ISPs IP owners? I think they should be one of the main payers in this scheme. Question is who should get the money. Definitely not the companies currently having IP assigned.
afiori 3y ago
The only way to manage scarce bounded resources fairly is with georgist taxation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism

the_mitsuhiko 3y ago

Considering the uneven distribution of IPv4 addresses I have doubts that this would play out in a healthy way.

danpalmer 3y ago

There is already a price, which is often significant given the lack of supply. I've read about several ISPs moving to IPv6 explicitly due to cost, and mobile carriers are well known to use v6 only (with gateways) to grow their market.

DeathArrow 3y ago

What if people start hoarding IPv6 addresses, too and the price of an IPv6 address rises?

sgjohnson 3y ago
Currently IPv6 addresses cost exactly nothing. You can get them from your RIR. As many as you reasonably need.
SAI_Peregrinus 3y ago
There are too many IPv6 addresses for hoarding them to be a problem any time in the next few hundred thousand years, at least with the current deployment strategies. Currently it's recommended for ISPs to hand out a /32 to every ISP that requests one, and a /48 to every ISP customer (though residential ISPs will often only hand out /64s). But only the 2000::/3 IPv6 space is available, the remaining 7/8ths is reserved in case that allocation strategy is too liberal.