[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Recovery Fund
Milton L Mueller
mueller at syr.edu
Sat Nov 22 11:12:56 EST 2008
Owen and Leo:
I support the idea of ARIN being able to offer economic incentives for
reclamation or reductions. The problem with your proposal, as Herrin
seems to have pointed out, is that you have not developed a feasible
mechanism for re-assigning the reclaimed resources in an environment of
Whatever your opinion of auctions, etc. you really, really need to get
used to the fact that you _cannot_ maintain the old system of first
come, first served needs-based allocations in a regime of ipv4 scarcity.
Once the free pool is depleted (and even now, when its depletion is in
sight) v4 allocations are about _relative_ value among competing
applicants, not some absolute measure of technical justification.
In other words, there will be multiple applicants for the same address
blocks and not all of them can be satisfied. All of them may have
"justified need" in some sense. You _must_ therefore use a rationing
principle. FCFS simply privileges those who invest in getting into line
first. I can think of 100 different ways that can happen that you will
not like, including the development of a brokerage firms. That just
shifts the bidding to the brokerage, it doesn't eliminate the bidding.
Whatever rationing principle is used ought to relate the allocation to
the degree of economic value the buyer (or society) places on the
Either you let auctions determine that, or you put ARIN into the
business of deciding via beauty contests who or what is more valuable. I
hope you understand how unfeasible the latter option is. If you don't,
your staff and the community soon will.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net]
> Behalf Of Owen DeLong
> I'm absolutely opposed to this alternative approach. The goal, here,
> my opinion is to remain as close to the first-come/first-serve
> justified need that we have in place now. The funding is strictly to
deal > with the fact that getting people to do the right thing requires
> The policy is written specifically to come as close as practicable to
> existing situation while still attempting to preserve some flow of
> addresses for people who need them.
> Auctioning the addresses off to the highest bidder is, IMHO, not in
> best interests of the community. Unfortunately, people on both sides
> of this opinion will point to FCC spectrum auctions as a shining
> of why it is a (good|bad) idea.
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML