[ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal

>
> I don't know whether 24 months is better than another length of time.
> However, it seems that the current proposal would mean that if a  
> network got
> a six month supply of IPv4 space from ARIN six months before the  
> IANA free
> pool was exhausted they would have to wait a further 18 months  
> before they
> could transfer away any prefixes they no longer needed. These  
> numbers would
> change if proposal 2007-22  is accepted.
>
If they just got a 6 month supply of addresses, shouldn't that imply  
that they
don't have any addresses they can free up?

I think this is a very strange corner case.  If you need more  
addressing through
the normal 6 month supply (or 12 if 2007-22 passes) process, then, I  
would
think the likelihood of you needing less at some point significantly  
less than
24 months down the road should be minimal.

> Is it possible to give an accurate prediction for how long ARIN will  
> be able
> to supply the minimum allocation size after IANA's free pool is  
> empty? If
> it's at least 18 months then I suppose that's OK. But an awkward  
> period
> where ARIN's free pool cannot supply the minimum allocation and  
> transfers
> are not yet allowed doesn't sound like a good idea.
>
I don't know.  I'm sure Leslie could probably pull something together.

> Is an awkward hiatus likely? What length of time would be needed to  
> make
> speculation unattractive but maintain a steady supply of address  
> space from
> ARIN or transfers?
>
My thinking is that for the first 18 or so months of needing  
transfers, it's
unlikely that legitimate requesters of IP address space would be in a
position to part with significant amounts of it.  Additionally, other  
longer-term
holders will probably supply the market at least somewhat during this
time.

Owen