Personally I'd rather hear from the RIRs regarding the value or not of making more IPv4 space such as 240/4 available. They're on the front lines of this.
I think sometimes what we're manipulating in these debates is the time factor: Someone with a worthy, immediate, urgent need versus some distant horizon which might be preferable in the big picture but is demanding possibly unreasonable sacrifices of some in the short term. I don't believe we are pondering making this IPv4 space available and then returning to the 1980s/1990s relative free-for-all. This all might be more interesting if driven by consideration of those needs. On March 13, 2022 at 13:54 jo...@iecc.com (John Levine) wrote: > It appears that Joe Maimon <jmai...@jmaimon.com> said: > >Saku Ytti wrote: > >> What if many/most large CDN, cloud, tier1 would commonly announce a > >> plan to drop all IPv4 at their edge 20 years from now? How would that > >> change our work? What would we stop doing and what would we start doing? > > > >I cant see how it would change or do anything IPv6-related for myself > >for at least 19 years. And I suspect most others would fall somewhere > >between that and never. > > Yet the four largest cable networks and all of the mobile networks in the > US have had full IPv6 support for years as do AWS, Google, Azure, Digital > Ocean, Linode, and many other hosting providers. > > Could you explain what "most" means where you are? > > R's, > John -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo*