The End of IPv4

[Douglas Pollard]

On 02/15/2011 02:48 PM, Kevin Hunter wrote:
> At 1:23pm -0500 Sun, 13 Feb 2011, Avi wrote:
>> And, even that said, it's far more likely that we'll just end up
>> with NAT upon NAT of ip4 connectivity, since there's no financial
>> incentive for anyone to switch to ip6, and nobody yet makes stable
>> ip6 networking gear (for the same reason).
>
> This is a good analysis.  Until something happens to give companies an 
> incentive to invest in and create quality IPv6 infrastructure, it 
> won't happen.  Relatedly, the military is a rather large spender in 
> most economies, and news like this offers hope:
>
> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/122010-dod-strongarms-suppliers-on-ipv6.html 
>
>
> If more big economic entities put stipulations like this in their 
> contracts, we'll see improvement in this area.  I have hope.
>
>> It's not like running out ip4 address space is going to kill the net,
>> just stop more people from joining.
>
> Which is the whole issue.  At the point that no one else can join, it 
> leaves those who already have IP addresses in a considerable position 
> of power, both monetarily and -- more importantly -- in terms of free 
> speech.  Yes, we have venues /currently/ but the point that IP 
> addresses become a limited commodity, they gain value via the basic 
> law of supply and demand.  When that happens, you can rest assured 
> that someone, or a group of someones, will attempt to gain power by 
> monopolizing the resource.  It may take awhile, but it will happen.
>
> Though I abhor the armed forces, and more generally dislike large 
> business, I hope more follow their example in the IPv6 regard.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Kevin
>
     You're right and for a short time they will make a bundle, enter 
Ipv6 as soon as there is $ to be made.
     Somebody will do it.  End of monopoly!!                    Doug