[arin-ppml] Q1 - ARIN address transferpolicy: whythetriggerdate?
kkargel at polartel.com
Wed Jun 25 09:46:14 EDT 2008
But those are not the only choices. Those are just the only choices
that allow us (network businesses) to take advantage of the situation to
take even more money.
As responsible administrators we are working to maintain network
operations, even through the 4-6 transition. We (network businesses)
should do this without raping our customers any more than absolutely
necessary. I believe we (network businesses) are for the most part
Perhaps working at a Co-op my viewpoint is skewed from those of you
working for a corporation, but I still have a hard time with accepting
the concept that an artificial market is good, except as a profit
ARIN is doing a great job. I cannot express my admiration sufficiently
for the way everything has worked thus far, even when I have encountered
frustrations along the way. The concept of minimalist controls and
governance they (we) have adopted thus far is brave, admirable and
Have some faith in the system and the community. Cooperative anarchy
has worked well for the internet up till now. I believe it will
continue to serve in the future. People will continue to work together
so that networks can interoperate, and will find creative and working
solutions to problems when they are needed.
I am trepiditious that should we (ARIN) create an artificial market that
the government may see it as a commodity and emplace the controls and
restrictions governing those (for the "good of the people"). Going
along with that should the government "try" to govern the IP market then
they will need to pay for that action somehow. The primary means the
government has of paying for things is taxes. I don't know about you
but I really don't want any new taxes.
From: Scott Leibrand [mailto:sleibrand at internap.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 11:58 AM
To: Kevin Kargel
Cc: ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Q1 - ARIN address transferpolicy:
Kevin Kargel wrote:
> I strongly oppose any effort to create an artificial IP commodities
> market. I know it is a philosophical stand and will draw many flames,
> but the Americans who most benefit from access to internet are the low
> to middle income groups, and adding even small charges to that access
> could take internet out of their grasp. Anything we can do to prevent
> raising that cost will benefit society. While we are all more
> comfortable than many families, please don't forget those who have to
> make hard decisions budgeting for residential information services.
Which will raise costs to those groups more: denying their ISPs the
ability to get new IPv4 addresses? Or allowing them to make a choice of
whether or not to get addresses on the transfer market?
If you're not sure, consider an analogy: which would it be better to
tell a low-income family? "I'm sorry, gas is too scarce, so we stopped
selling it here: you'll need to ride the bus." or "I'm sorry gas is so
expensive: if it works better for you, you might want to consider riding
the bus instead."
More information about the ARIN-PPML