[arin-ppml] On whether morality can be the loneargumentagainsta transfer market (was Re: 2008-6: EmergencyTransferPolicyfor IPv4 Addresses)

[Alexander, Daniel]

Kevin,
 
"still or need" may have been a poor choice of words. I did not mean to
imply that paid transfers were a forgone conclusion. I was only trying
to direct the question to those who feel that paid transfers are
necessary, and whether they would still feel that way if the last RIR /8
was rationed for extending IPv4 allocations, AND a functional IPv4/IPv6
translator was available.

-Dan
 

-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
Behalf Of Kevin Kargel
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 5:10 PM
To: ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] On whether morality can be the
loneargumentagainsta transfer market (was Re: 2008-6:
EmergencyTransferPolicyfor IPv4 Addresses)

Sigh, the internet doesn't "need" paid transfers now, so then no, it
would not "still" need paid transfers.

Despite all the talk there is no forgone conclusion that a transfer
policy is a requirement.  To the contrary, the transfer policy talk is
preventing people from returning unused space.  Why would anyone
surrender unneeded IP space if there were a likelyhood or even a
possibility that that space will hold monetary value?  




> Some might be quick to dismiss this as impossible or improbable, but 
> for the sake of discussion, do you think the Internet would still need

> paid transfers?
> 
> -Dan



-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
Behalf Of Alexander, Daniel
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 4:52 PM
To: David Williamson; michael.dillon at bt.com; ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] On whether morality can be the lone
argumentagainsta transfer market (was Re: 2008-6: Emergency
TransferPolicyfor IPv4 Addresses)


Suppose the RIRs implement policy to provide for existing and new
entrants, along the lines of prop-062 (use of final /8), or 2008-5
(Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 deployment), or some other
proposals that provides three to five years of IPv4 allocations from the
final /8 given to each Registry. 

Also suppose the IETF found it possible to create standards of some IPv4
to IPv6 translation mechanisms to provide communications between the
protocols. 

Some might be quick to dismiss this as impossible or improbable, but for
the sake of discussion, do you think the Internet would still need paid
transfers? 

-Dan