[ppml] Policy Proposal 2008-2: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal

[Jim Weyand]

Does our economist monitor this list?  There is a lot of language in the
rationale section that says that many of the restrictions on trade are
designed to limit speculation.  Is speculation worse than living with
the restrictions imposed by this proposal?

For example one restriction is that if you transfer address space to
another party you may not receive address space for another 24 months.
This means that if you have a nice large block you are prevented from
transferring the entire block to another party and getting a more
suitable block in return.

This restriction will also artificially increase the "market price" of a
block of addresses since I will only take the risk of running out of
addresses in next 24 months if it is very rewarding.

I'd like to hear our economist's (Ben?) comments on the cost to the
community of the restrictions v. speculation.

Even with these restrictions I can support this policy, however I think
it is worthwhile to consider the "hidden" costs associated with these
restrictions.

-Jim Weyand

-----Original Message-----
From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of
Leo Bicknell
Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 10:50 AM
To: arin ppml
Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2008-2: IPv4 Transfer Policy
Proposal

In a message written on Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 10:27:02AM -0500, Cliff
Bedore wrote:
> I think we need to make sure the ARIN attorneys look at this from the
> standpoint of "How can I beat the system".  I expect they are
honorable and
> above board and that's probably a disadvantage when trying to ensure
all the
> i's are dotted and the t's are crossed and the vultures are kept at
bay.

The ARIN AC has worked closely with both Steve Ryan, ARIN Council
and Ben Edelman, who many saw at the last meeting for his Economics
background, but in addition to his PhD in economics also has a J.D.
from Harvard Law and is admitted to the Massachusetts Bar.  They
both provided significant input that the AC used to better craft
the policy language to strengthen ARIN's legal position were this
policy to be adopted.

That's not to say they don't have some concerns.  Nothing is 100%
in law, particularly when there is limited case law on the subject.
I believe both will be at the Denver meeting able to answer questions
about legal risk.  As with all policies, ARIN Council will generate
a legal review of the policy prior to the meeting which should both
be posted to PPML and reviewed at the meeting.

I strongly urge anyone with legal concerns to either come to Denver,
or participate remotely.

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/