Not that I want to be in this argument, but I was intrigued by the
name-dropping from folks who're not silly...
Ned Freed wrote:
BTW, I suspect you are correct about about the IPv6 transition not being Pareto
efficient at the present time, but IMO the bigger issue is that it is widely
percieved as not even being Kaldor-Hicks efficient, due in large part to
address space exhaustion being seen as an externality.
So there is a nice Wiki page about both, but the one about the latter
says in part:
"Another problem with Kaldor-Hicks efficiency is that it only considers
private property and private income but does not take into account
change in value of the Commons, Natural Environment, and other
Externalities."
So, in this case, neither measure of efficiency blindingly obviously
applies (the latter being a genaralisation of the former) since the
items in question are very much part of a commons, natural environment
or, whatever it means, an externality.
The discussion about which stacks don't/could support these addresses
in what timeframe, is more interesting IMO.
S.
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf