[ppml] alternative realities (was PIv6 for legacy holders (/w RSA + efficient use))

[Tom Vest]

On Aug 1, 2007, at 11:26 AM, William Herrin wrote:

>> On 8/1/07, Paul Vixie <paul at vix.com> wrote:
>>> but in all the assertions of a market's inevitability, and even  
>>> among the
>>> excellent falsifications provided yesterday by william [H]errin,  
>>> noone other
>>> than michael dillon has challenged the basic assertion that there  
>>> are goods
>>> and/or services to be marketed.
>>
>> There are at least two methods to
>> rent or sell IP addresses which function within the existing policy
>>
>> 1. The Ruse. Something other than IP addresses is leased but the
>> practical affect is to indefinitely lease the IP addresses.
>> 2. The Container Sale. Instead of selling the IP addresses, you sell
>> the entity which holds the registration.
>
>
> Let me offer a concrete example of the ruse and the container sale:
>
> Container Sale: In the late 1990's, Verio purchased Clark Net, a local
> Internet Service Provider serving Baltimore and Washington DC. With
> the purchase, Verio gained control of the IP addresses allocated to
> Clark Net.
>
> The Ruse: In 2003 or so, Verio sold its T1 accounts in the Clark Net
> region to Cogent. The associated IP addresses were reallocated to
> Cogent. In many cases these were prefixes longer than /24. Cogent
> served these with IP transit purchased in bulk from Verio. In other
> cases the addresses combined to form /24's and shorter prefixes. These
> were deaggregated from the larger Verio/Clark Net blocks and
> separately announced.
>
> Calling it a ruse may be misleading because this is clearly a
> legitimate business transaction where the primary asset was not IP
> addresses. Nevertheless, the consequence is the same: IP address
> blocks have been split up and portions permanently transferred from
> entity to entity without RIR involvement and in exchange for
> remuneration.

Since the categorization will likely inform the proposed responses,  
it's perhaps not merely quibbling to reiterate that "the ruse" in  
this case seems to be just another variety of "container transfer".  
In some sense all protocol number transfers that do not comply with  
concurrent policies (whatever they may be at the time) are "ruse- 
like" by definition, so it's not clear why one would attribute more  
or less misfeasance/malfeasance to some transactions than others --  
unless of course they occurred in direct contravention to  
authoritative (meaning at present, RIR) guidance.

It's perhaps also worth noting that so described the "container sale"  
is just a special case of the general method of network business  
strategy/problem solving which occurs at every level -- e.g. company  
acquisitions to secure cable or sat landings to address  
geographically isolated markets, or to secure established  
interconnection relationships to address topo/logically isolated  
markets. The (ISP) interprets all such impediments as congestion and  
routes around -- so perhaps there are other historical observations/ 
lessons that can be applied here...

TV