[arin-discuss] SPAM-WARN:Re: [ppml] Counsel statement on Legacyassignments?(fwd)

As to the legacy holders getting a free ride, for those of you who  
think that
ARIN not charging them is giving them a competitive advantage, please
consider the following:

1.	It's pretty clear that ARIN revocation of legacy addresses is a  
non-starter.
	A.	The community does not seem to have the will to do it.
	B.	If the community wanted to do it, it is unclear how it would play  
out
		legally.
	C.	Even if ARIN were given clear legal authority to revoke such
		assignments, it is unclear what would happen on the internet.
	D.	The damage to the internet that would result from such an attempt
		far exceeds any likely gains that might come from it, so, generally,
		we end up back at A.

2.	The majority of legacy address holdings would be treated by ARIN as
	direct end-user assignments.  As such, their total ARIN fees would be
	$100 per year.  Some percentage of legacy holders are already paying
	this fee.  I doubt such a fee would have a significant impact on the
	competitive landscape.

3.	The majority of "free ride" complaints seem to center around the
	differences in the ability to obtain addresses more than the inequity
	in the cost of those addresses.  Due to 1, above, it is unlikely that
	any action ARIN could take would resolve this issue.  Also, the
	phrase "The early bird gets the worm" comes to mind in this
	scenario.  For any finite resource, the companies that begin
	exploiting the resource early tend to have an advantage over those
	who come later.  This is the nature of the beast.  Internet registered
	unique IPv4 addresses are a finite resource. Those who got them
	early have some advantage over those who did not. I don't see
	a practical way to change this fact retroactively.  I do think that
	the situation is somewhat better in IPv6, but, that a similar problem
	will probably appear if IPv6 ever becomes effectively finite.

Owen