Table of Contents
• IPv4 addresses will remain scarce after 2026, with transfers and leasing dominating access
• IPv6 adoption is the only sustainable solution, but progress remains uneven and politically shaped
Introduction: the end of easy IPv4
The global Internet has been living with IPv4 scarcity for more than a decade. The era of freely available IPv4 addresses is long over, replaced by a patchwork of recovery pools, transfer markets and technical workarounds. Looking beyond 2026, the reality is clear: no new supply is coming, and the way networks obtain and manage IPv4 addresses will continue to change in ways that favour incumbents and well-capitalised operators.
While the Internet has not “run out” of IPv4 in a literal sense, it has run out of simple, equitable allocation mechanisms. What remains is a constrained market where price, policy and technical compromise increasingly dictate who can grow and who cannot.
The long view: scarcity without collapse
Geoff Huston, chief scientist at APNIC, has repeatedly argued that IPv4 scarcity is not an existential crisis for the Internet, but a structural transition. He has warned that while mechanisms such as network address translation and address transfers have allowed the Internet to continue growing, they also delay the inevitable transition to IPv6 and risk fragmenting the network over time.
“There is still no evidence of a common sense of urgency around IPv6 deployment,” Huston has noted, arguing that the industry has become too comfortable relying on short-term fixes rather than structural change.
How we got here: a brief history of IPv4 depletion
The global pool of IPv4 addresses was exhausted in stages. After the central Internet Assigned Numbers Authority distributed its final blocks, each Regional Internet Registry followed its own path toward depletion. Today, all regions operate under post-exhaustion policies, with only small reclaimed pools available and strict allocation rules in place.
As a result, transfers between organisations have become the dominant mechanism for acquiring IPv4 space. These transfers — whether permanent sales or time-limited leases — now underpin growth for many internet service providers, cloud operators and content platforms.
What will define the post-2026 IPv4 market
After 2026, IPv4 will function primarily as a managed asset rather than a freely allocated public resource. Several trends are likely to intensify.
First, demand for “clean” address blocks with stable routing histories will remain strong, particularly in regions with high regulatory and compliance requirements. Second, leasing arrangements will continue to expand, Leasing is also a measurable part of today’s ecosystem—CAIDA/IMC research infers that 4.1% of advertised IPv4 prefixes were leased (April 2024) and reports that leased address space is significantly more likely to be abused, which helps explain why “clean” blocks with good history can carry a premium. Third, pricing will increasingly reflect geography, reputation and block size rather than simple scarcity.
At the same time, the market may begin to stabilise in regions where IPv6 adoption reduces dependence on IPv4 for new services.
The limits of NAT and address sharing
Carrier-grade NAT and other address-sharing technologies have enabled millions of users to connect using a shrinking pool of public IPv4 addresses. However, these approaches introduce technical debt.
Address sharing complicates network troubleshooting, degrades support for peer-to-peer and real-time applications, and places growing pressure on logging, security and compliance systems. Engineers have long warned that NAT-based architectures weaken the Internet’s original end-to-end design and should be treated as transitional, not permanent.
Why IPv6 remains the only durable solution
IPv6 eliminates address scarcity entirely, yet its adoption has progressed unevenly. Large mobile operators and global platforms have led the transition, benefiting from lower long-term costs and architectural simplicity. Smaller providers and enterprises, however, often delay adoption due to upfront investment, skills gaps or perceived lack of urgency.
Paul Wilson, former director general of APNIC, has framed the issue bluntly: every service deployed without IPv6 today represents a deferred cost tomorrow. The longer IPv6 adoption is postponed, the more expensive and disruptive the eventual transition becomes.
Winners, losers and structural inequality
IPv4 scarcity has clear distributional effects. Operators with large legacy address holdings enjoy strategic advantages, while newer entrants face higher barriers to entry. Regions with slower IPv6 deployment are more exposed to rising IPv4 costs and technical constraints.
This imbalance risks reinforcing digital inequality, particularly in developing markets where access costs already limit connectivity. Without coordinated policy incentives and investment, market forces alone may deepen these divides.
Are there any realistic ways to unlock more IPv4?
Occasionally, proposals emerge to reclaim unused legacy space or repurpose reserved address ranges. While technically possible in theory, these ideas face enormous coordination, legal and operational challenges. Retrofitting billions of devices and applications would likely cost more than the addresses are worth.
In practical terms, transfers, reclamation of unused blocks and conservation remain the only viable mechanisms for managing IPv4 supply.
What Network Operators should do next?
For network operators planning beyond 2026, several priorities are clear. IPv4 should be treated as a finite asset, carefully audited and optimised. Leasing may make sense in the short term, but long-term strategies should assume declining availability and rising complexity.
Most importantly, IPv6 should move from a “future project” to a default deployment model. Dual-stack networks remain the safest transition path, but IPv6-only services are becoming increasingly viable.
Frequently Asked Questions
-
Will IPv4 addresses completely run out after 2026?
No. IPv4 addresses will continue to exist and circulate through transfers and leases, but no new free pools will emerge.
-
Can NAT solve IPv4 scarcity permanently?
No. NAT allows temporary scaling but introduces complexity, performance limitations and architectural compromises.
-
Are IPv4 addresses still valuable?
Yes. IPv4 addresses remain valuable assets, particularly in regions with slow IPv6 adoption or regulatory constraints.
-
Should organisations still invest in IPv4?
Only as a short-term necessity. Long-term investment should prioritise IPv6-enabled infrastructure and services.
-
Is IPv6 adoption unavoidable?
Yes. IPv6 is the only solution that removes address scarcity entirely and restores scalable end-to-end connectivity.
Sell IPv4 Addresses
Network Partners
Blog
Insights
Knowledge Base
Support Center
Mini Speaker
Log In
