[AusNOG] Prediction: Google et. al. may artificially penalise IPv4 clients

[Mark Smith]

On 1 May 2017 at 13:17, Mark Delany <g2x at juliet.emu.st> wrote:
>> > Exactly. The PR risk is huge. Regardless of their altruism, US-based
>> > 800lb gorillas imposing their will on under-resourced non-US ISPs is
>> > not a message you want sprayed all over the twitter-verse.
>> >
>>
>> These under-resourced ISPs may already be zombies.
>
> Perhaps a better choice of wording on my part might be
> lesser-resourced compared to google. I.e. all ISPs in AU.
>
>> IPv6 has been coming for a very long time
>
> I know. I was writing about it in AUUGN over 20 years ago.
>
>> Punishing v4 recalcitrants is fundamentally unavoidable.
>
> The full set of choices are reward, punish or wait.
>
> One way of moving forward is to genuinely make v4 scarce.
>
>A rich
> pro-ipv6 benefactor could buy up all the v4 space that comes available
> so ISPs have no choice.
>
> But that's not cheap as there is still a *lot* of v4 space out there,
> eg, MIT, DOD, IBM, Xerox, Ford and HP all have /8s. At $10 per IP what
> is that, hundreds of millions of dollars?
>
> The reality is that v4 is actually not anywhere near in short supply
> yet so we have a long way to go before v4 pricing is enough incentive
> for ISPs.
>

I think you're assuming that the ISP is the only actor involved, and
that an ISP not deploying IPv6 has no external consequence.

I think we've just seen an external consequence for the first time,
and that can change the dynamics of the situation - new actors become
involved that have different motivations and desired outcomes than the
prior actor(s).

Regards,
Mark.