[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Recovery Fund

[Milton L Mueller]

> > rpki
> >
> > as to transfer, please read
http://archive.psg.com/071208.transfer.pdf
> 
> Pointing to this document as an answer is like saying:
> 
> "Every vehicle is sold with a unique VIN number; from this all
> necessary automotive title, registration, licensing, operation, and
> traffic rules are self-evident."

Title and registration for IPv4 addresses do in fact exist already. 

The question asked was: how can a "NEED" requirement be maintained by a
third party in a system driven by bilateral transfers? If I understand
Randy's point it is that RPKI allows the third party to be in a position
to approve the transfer before it actually takes effect. (licensing, if
you will)

The reference to operation and traffic rules is an irrelevant
exaggeration. 

Personally, I don't think needs assessment is necessary for transfers to
work as long as there are rules to prevent speculation. The sooner ya'll
give up on this cargo-cult religion the easier this will all become.
Needs assessment is an appropriation rule that assumes a free pool. The
whole notion is just completely out of place when there is no free pool.