Subject: Last Call for Comment: Policy Proposal 2001-7

[Jim Fleming]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Trevor Paquette" <Trevor.Paquette at TeraGo.ca>
To: <ppml at arin.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 1:30 PM
Subject: RE: Subject: Last Call for Comment: Policy Proposal 2001-7


> As per the consensus at the Public Policy meeting, I think
> this policy should be passed as is to the BoT.
> 
> --
> 
> Trevor Paquette          |TeraGo Networks Inc.  |Work:(403)668-5321
> Trevor.Paquette at TeraGo.ca|300, 300 Manning Rd NE|Cell:(403)703-8738
> Lead Systems Architect   |Calgary, AB, Canada   |Main:(403)668-5300
> http://www.terago.ca     |       T2E 4K8        | Fax:(403)668-5344
> 
> 

If I recall, ICANN uses a capital C, when they write consensus.
It is good to see that ARIN has a different style consensus, but
the outcome is the same as ICANN.

It all boils down to fairness.
Which list do you think is more fair ?
The "toy" IPv4 Internet Early Experimentation Allocations ?
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space
or
The Proof-of-Concept IPv8 Allocations ?
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt

Why would people pay for Address Space, when it is FREE ?

Jim Fleming
http://www.DOT-BIZ.com
http://www.in-addr.info
3:219 INFO