Three years and one day ago, I wrote on this very list:

"...Personally I'm rather sick and tired of hearing people say 'yes, let's break IPv4 so we all MUST move to IPv6'. If you think this is good policy or even good engineering, please think again. It will make us end up with a broken internet that, surprise, we won't be managing any more. Breaking IPv4 might lead to increased IPv6 adoption, but not on the internet as we know it today. Everybody who wants to connect his organisation to the internet is going to need at least some IPv4 address space for the time being, so why screw it up for new entrants?..."

Whether this is about reinventing final /8 or about people making money on IPv4 transfers does not make one jot of a difference.

Remco

(no hats)

On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 1:54 PM Sebastian Wiesinger <sebastian@karotte.org> wrote:

* Dan Lüdtke <mail@danrl.de> [2015-05-08 11:33]:
> See, we can not win this games. Let’s stop wasting energy and
> resources on dealing with legacy IP and how to make it work for a
> bit longer. New entrants are entering are market that is not fair,
> and we can not make a real difference. The only way forward is to
> push IPv6 and restore a healthy climate regarding the availability
> of IP addresses.

Dan,

if you don't want to invest your time trying to make this market more
fair by all means go ahead and do something else. There are still
people here who would like to try so that new players can enter a
market that will be dominated by IPv4 for some time to come.

Most people here are pushing IPv6 but as much as you want to bury IPv4
it will still be around for some time.

Regards

Sebastian

--
GPG Key: 0x93A0B9CE (F4F6 B1A3 866B 26E9 450A 9D82 58A2 D94A 93A0 B9CE)
'Are you Death?' ... IT'S THE SCYTHE, ISN'T IT? PEOPLE ALWAYS NOTICE THE SCYTHE.
-- Terry Pratchett, The Fifth Elephant