[arin-ppml] Tax incentive for renumbering-related labor costs?

[Tom Vest]

On Oct 21, 2008, at 7:33 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:

> The problem with such an estimate is that it assumes renumbering
> effort is proportional to network size.

The problem with not fielding such an estimate is that no sane  
politician would consider sponsoring it.
Come on folks,  I thought that my use of the terms like "plausible"  
and "ballpark" would be enough to earn me a pass on assumptions of  
ignorance about the real-world diversity of production environments...

No one wants to even venture a guess? No one else has seen a  
consultant study on renumbering costs that could be mined for a  
barebones "plausible" estimate?

TV


> A /24 that is, for example, not referenced in external configuration
> data (not containing nameservers, not in ACLs, not being used to
> terminate VPNs) is much easier to remember than even a /28
> that contains a bunch of VPN terminators that have lots of tunnels
> configured to third parties.
>
> Owen
>
> On Oct 21, 2008, at 3:23 PM, Tom Vest wrote:
>
>> Anyone care to suggest plausible "ballpark" renumbering-related labor
>> costs for one IPv4 /24?
>> I vaguely recall hearing about a couple of private studies estimating
>> such costs...
>>
>> Anyone think that this kind of tax incentive would be sufficient to
>> motivate returns to ARIN?
>>
>> What (if any) legal changes would be required to permit U.S.-based
>> IPv4 holders to claim U.S. tax benefits like this for address space
>> returned to ARIN?
>>
>> Obviously lots of variables, esp. if other jurisdictions/RIRs are
>> considered, but is this worth investigating?
>>
>> TV
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> 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:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>