[arin-ppml] Q2: on Address Transfers - Overkill on the freeze period?
Milton L Mueller
mueller at syr.edu
Fri Jun 20 10:25:31 EDT 2008
In the ARIN proposal, the releasing party cannot have received any IPv4 addresses, either from ARIN or from transfers, in the past 24 months, and cannot request any for the next 24 months. So anyone who participates on the release side of a transfer must remove themselves from the ARIN v4 allocation/assignment process for a total of four years.
Ostensibly, the rationale here is to prevent hoarding and speculation. But it seems like overkill. Is this intended to be punitive? Is the rationale really a Ted-style "you immoral bastards held on to address space you didn't need and so now we're going to screw you back" kind of an attitude?
The problem here is the huge disincentive it creates to release any address space. Unless the address block involved and the money exchanged is pretty darn large and the entity has zero chance of asking for any more ipv4, who's going to put up with a 4-year time out from mama ARIN? What's your goal here -- do you want to rub people's noses in the need-based ideology or do you want to get them to give up addresses?
Wouldn't it be simpler to block speculation the way RIPE proposes, and simply restrict -- on the recipient side -- transfer of the received addresses for two years?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML