[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 2008-6: Emergency TransferPolicyfor IPv4 Addresses - Last Call

[Matthew Kaufman]

Kevin Kargel wrote:
>
> ...
>
> My base feelings are that if what we are after is profit taking then perhaps
> an IP market is the way to go.  This would not be my primary goal, but then
> I am not and likely will never be declared king of the world.  If the
> position opens up though I am available.  
>
> If what we are after really is managing and controlling the "Black Market"
> IP infrastructure then the way to do it is to diminish the value of the
> commodity, which in this case is quasi/non registered IP blocks.  Without
> value or operability of the commodity the black market would collapse.
>
>   
I think there's a third possibility, that seems to be included in 
neither of the above, which is simply convincing people who are using 
IPv4 addresses to use fewer and return the rest. Some of that will be 
because there's a profit to be had (in the form of decisions like "is it 
more valuable to keep running this ISP with public address space, or 
shut it down / change it to a NATed-address ISP in trade for an 
immediate cash payout"), but I suspect even more of the money that 
changes hands will cover the people and equipment required to release 
the addresses to other users.

It is very hard to convince a CIO to allocate equipment budget and staff 
time towards renumbering into private address space, setting up NAT, 
renumbering nameservers, etc. without presenting a proposal that 
includes "and when we do that, we get back 110% of the above cost in the 
form of cash" at the end. For enough return, the CIO might even agree to 
let the staff spend the time and money turning on IPv6!

Matthew Kaufman