[ppml] Markets, pricing, transparency, 2008-2 / 8.3.9
Jo Rhett
jrhett at svcolo.com
Mon Mar 17 17:48:06 EDT 2008
- Previous message: [ppml] Markets, pricing, transparency, 2008-2 / 8.3.9
- Next message: [ppml] Markets, pricing, transparency, 2008-2 / 8.3.9
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mar 17, 2008, at 12:44 PM, Tom Vest wrote: > driven by, alternately, increased recurring membership fees that > increment based on actual IPv4 holdings, which could be wholly offset A large portion of the reasoning behind this policy was to get legacy IP holders to free up space. 1. They don't pay fees today, and wouldn't if we increased fees. 2. They would have less incentive to participate, as when they do this deal they have to sign the RSA. If the costs for their IP space increase, then they have less incentive to sign the RSA and thus, to participate. I think that a nice side effect of the proposed policy (might be) that we'd get more legacy holders to sign the RSA ;-) -- Jo Rhett senior geek Silicon Valley Colocation Support Phone: 408-400-0550
- Previous message: [ppml] Markets, pricing, transparency, 2008-2 / 8.3.9
- Next message: [ppml] Markets, pricing, transparency, 2008-2 / 8.3.9
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list