[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Equitable Distribution of IPv4Resources before IPv4 Run out

[Michael Thomas - Mathbox]

Mike

> organizations.  One could make the argument that the present 
> pricing structure plays favorites to the Extra Large 
> organizations when you factor a cost per-IP, but that would 
> be an argument for another day.  :-)

Less than a year ago, there were people arguing that IP addresses had no
monetary value; that the pricing structure was fair, etc, ad nauseum. Six
months later, someone proposes setting up an IP sales clearing house. Irony
has its entertainment value.

Michael Thomas

> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net 
> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Michael K. 
> Smith - Adhost
> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 12:11 PM
> To: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Equitable 
> Distribution of IPv4Resources before IPv4 Run out
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net 
> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf
> > Of Edward Lewis
> > Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 7:24 AM
> > To: Member Services
> > Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Equitable 
> Distribution of IPv4
> > Resources before IPv4 Run out
> > 
> > At 10:36 -0400 5/21/08, Member Services wrote:
> > 
> > >Policy Proposal Name: Equitable Distribution of IPv4 
> Resources before
> > >IPv4 Run out
> > 
> > I question why a "needs based" allocation ought to be abandoned
> > within ARIN as ARIN's (new) v4 pool is nearing depletion.  I don't
> > think it is up to ARIN to play favorites, which is what this policy
> > does.  ARIN isn't here to protect the small fry from the big fry or
> > to help the big fry get bigger.
> > 
> > Perhaps we ought to reserve the last /8 only for NAT-PT boxes
> > addresses. ;)  But that is as far as I'd go.
> > 
> 
> In one sense the policy is indeed intended to play favorites, 
> but I prefer to view it as a community service in support of 
> smaller organizations, not as a penalization of the larger 
> organizations.  One could make the argument that the present 
> pricing structure plays favorites to the Extra Large 
> organizations when you factor a cost per-IP, but that would 
> be an argument for another day.  :-)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Mike
>