Re: [sig-policy] prop-056-v001: IPv4 soft landing

[Leo Vegoda <leo.vegoda@icann.org>]

Hi David,

[...]

There is a possible unintended consequence of your proposal.

> Disadvantages:
>
>     This proposal:
>
>     - May make it difficult for some ISPs to obtain IPv4 addresses
>       earlier than would be the case if there was no change in IPv4
>       allocation policy.

- May encourage the deployment of additional layers of NAT rather than IPv6.

If you wanted to encourage the deployment of IPv6 you should change the
language from "all non-RFC 1918 address space used for internal
infrastructure" to "all non-IPv6 address space used for internal
infrastructure".

I am not sure whether I am being unnecessarily pessimistic. What do people
think?

Regards,

Leo