While I have respect for honest work, I believe the premise is wrong.
We do not need more IPv4 addresses. We need less. IPv4 availability is hampering IPv6 transition. Regions that have few IPv4 addresses have much better IPv6 support, and it is primarily those with lots of IPv4 addresses that are dragging their feet and the rest of the world with them.
I propose ICANN and RIR add a requirement on all IPv4 registrations that either IPv6 connectivity is available to their customers, or they lost 10%/y of their IPv4 addresses, to be redistributed to those that support IPv6 yet require IPv4 because of the former laggards.
1 comment
[ 2.2 ms ] story [ 10.3 ms ] threadWe do not need more IPv4 addresses. We need less. IPv4 availability is hampering IPv6 transition. Regions that have few IPv4 addresses have much better IPv6 support, and it is primarily those with lots of IPv4 addresses that are dragging their feet and the rest of the world with them.
I propose ICANN and RIR add a requirement on all IPv4 registrations that either IPv6 connectivity is available to their customers, or they lost 10%/y of their IPv4 addresses, to be redistributed to those that support IPv6 yet require IPv4 because of the former laggards.