[arin-ppml] Looking at just the pro and con merits of 2009-1 review

[Seth Mattinen]

Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> Scott Beuker wrote:
>> First off, I am opposed to 2009-1 because I'm opposed to any transfer
>> policy that would allow resources, acquired from ARIN with
>> justification for use, to be sold in a manner that clearly
>> demonstrates the justification was false. I understand the desire to
>> motivate people to free up IPs, but I can't support a policy that also
>> encourages pre-exhaustion hoarding.
>>   
> 
> I think you're missing a key point: there is a big gap between
> justification and minimum requirements.  For instance, an end-user org
> with PI space might have a /16 that is, in fact, justified under current
> policy, but they could also _choose_ to renumber into RFC 1918 space,
> use NAT in a /24 (or PA space), and sell that /16 to someone with a
> greater need.  Ditto for those mega-ISPs with more than a /8 of space:
> they _could_ NAT those tens of millions of eyeballs.

Need and justification would never be part of the equation. You could
make a fortune selling a /16 to someone desperate enough to get more
IPv4 space. I certainly would if someone came my way offering millions
of dollars for me to transfer it over.

Wait a minute, this sounds familiar, kind of like domain name transfers.

~Seth