On 17/07/2008, at 12:59 PM, David Woodgate wrote:
12 million addresses represents 12 million people (or more, using NAT) who could otherwise be connected to the Internet.
So we've given up on IPv6 altogether? Should we be reclaiming address space from all those ISPs out there who it would seem are wasting valuable IPv4 space by not NATing their customers?
While it is debatable how much space needs to be put aside for new entrants late in the IPv4 game, what is not debatable is the uneven distribution that will occur when we first start using that last /8.
For larger LIRs (large incumbents!) this is not a problem as they will be on the beneficial side of this uneven, and unfair, distribution. Large LIRs will be able to justify large blocks of this large space based on current allocation policies, at the expense of new smaller players. Smoothing this uneven distribution requires that this last /8 is held in reserve with vastly different allocation policies to that in place now.