[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-8: Transfer Policy Clarifications

Daniel Feenberg feenberg at nber.org
Wed Mar 7 19:03:56 EST 2007

On Thu, 8 Mar 2007, Randy Bush wrote:

>> Yes, I'd wager everyone on this list has been clear on that for
>> sometime.
> hmmm.  then why are fees proportional to the amound of resources
> one holds?
> suggest looking at ripe fee model, now being considered in apnic,
> where resources are 'aged' for the purpose of fee calculation, on
> the assumptions that
>  o fees are for service not rental of resource, and
>  o service cost declines the longer you hold the resource
> randy

Without commenting on the content, I believe the word needed here is 
"inalienable". For example, a peasant in the middle ages had the right to 
farm his plot as long as he gave the required share to the lord of the 
manor, but not the right to sell or rent his plot to another. His rights 
could not be transferred (other than by inheiritance), hence inalienable. 
I believe this is analogous to the situation ARIN seeks to describe, 
unless ARIN seeks to retain the right to recall allocations arbitrarily.

Daniel Feenberg

> _______________________________________________
> PPML mailing list
> PPML at arin.net
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list