[ppml] NANOG IPv4 Exhaustion BoF

[Tom Vest]

On Mar 6, 2008, at 1:31 PM, Tony Li wrote:

>
>
> |It is probably worthwhile remembering that (at least in the ARIN  
> case)
> |we're talking about life after the exhaustion of the IANA IPv4 free
> |pool.  The definition of "hoarding" will likely be subject to some
> |debate.
> |
> |For example, there is a well known university sitting on a /8.  Is
> |that hoarding?
>
>
> Of course not.  But say if Warren Buffet decided to buy up every  
> prefix,
> drive up prices and then dole them out with an eye dropper, that would
> distort the market.


You seem to be postulating a market, and a market norm, and an ethic  
which does not exist in the absence of "effective" rules.

If the largest ISPs rush out and buy up as much IPv4 as they can  
today, in anticipation of "need" they know they'll have in the future  
-- but also thereby get out ahead other operators that also have  
"need" today -- isn't that a kind of hoarding? When any buying today  
exceeds "need" today, it has a distorting -- inflationary and  
anticompetitive -- effect regardless of whether that was the primary  
goal or just a convenient side-effect.

Anyone who assumes the kind of operator behavior that makes markets  
absolutely inevitable, should also assume that hoarding for  
profiteering or simply to keep down the competition will be the norm.  
Anyone who assumes the kind of operator behavior that makes markets  
absolutely inevitable, should also assume that any countervailing  
rules that can be easily bypassed without consequence (i.e.,  
"ineffective" rules) will be ignored.

(that's not being critical of operators, just being internally  
consistent with assumptions)

TV