[ppml] Address Space versus Routing Slots

David Conrad drc at virtualized.org
Fri May 5 19:26:44 EDT 2006


On May 5, 2006, at 1:59 AM, Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com wrote:
> At the same
> time I believe it likely that ARIN will not accept new ISP
> applicants for IPv4 PA space but will only allocate that
> space to existing ISPs.

:-).  And people complain now about how the RIRs restrain trade...

>> In conventional markets scarcity tends to operate as a pricing  
>> premium factor. Market behaviours would then imply an entirely  
>> different behaviour in terms of IPv4 address distribution  
>> functions. Release of current address holdings
>> based on conversion to address compression technologies could come  
>> into play within a market-based pricing dynamic.
> If you are unable to say this stuff in Plain English then I wonder  
> why you bother to participate in the PUBLIC Policy Mailing List. If  
> the PUBLIC can't make heads or tails of your sentences, then what  
> is the point?

Um.  I'm a member of the PUBLIC and what Geoff is saying is fairly  
plain to me.  Which words did you have trouble with?

>>    The policy questions such a market dynamic would appear to raise
>>    include: What form of market regulation would be appropriate?  
>> How would
>>    it be applied? Who would apply it? Why would it be useful to have?
> Totally irrelevant here. ARIN does not impose market regulation.

Don't be silly. Sure it does. ARIN and the other RIRs do not permit  
independent trade in address space.  For ARIN, see section 8 of the  
NPRM. They explicitly regulate the market into official non- 
existence, forcing address space trading into the black or gray  
market.  Pretending such regulation doesn't exist wastes everyone's  

> If you want the UN to take over the RIR system and ask national
> governments to impose regulation then why don't you just say so?
> But don't expect a friendly reception here because most of us are
> opposed to the type of government control that you support.

These two sentences don't appear to correlate with anything Geoff was  
saying.  Were you, perhaps, responding to a different message and  
made a cut-and-paste mistake?

> Overall model? Who says we need an overall model?

Well, an overall model exists, whether anyone says it is needed or  
not.  The current overall model is defined within the existing RIR  
structures and policies which evolve over time.  It is decentralized,  
bottom-up driven and one operational component of that model is that  
it currently disallows market-based mechanisms to improve address  
utilization efficiencies in IPv4 for good or ill.  Whether or not  
this model will evolve to a market-based approach is a subject of  
fairly frequent, if not annoyingly repetitive, discussion on this  
list among others.

>> The above are my personal opinions, of course.
> Does this mean that APNIC did not send you here to mess
> with ARIN politics in order to gain support for your
> "one global model" viewpoint? Why should we believe that?

Damn, Geoff.  You've been found out.  You're going to lose your Black  
Helicopter for sure now.  The European Wing of the Illuminati has  
exposed you on the ARIN field of battle, now you'll have to regroup  
and ply the Protocols of APNIC via LACNIC or AfriNIC.  Too bad.   
Longer flights and less convenient connections.


Michael: in my memory, this was probably the worst message you've  
sent on this mailing list.

My opinions are my own and do not necessarily represent the
opinions of any organization I may be a part of.  So there.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list