[arin-ppml] Alternative to arbitrary transfers

[Seth Mattinen]

Leo Vegoda wrote:
> Kevin,
> 
> On 06/04/2009 10:15, "Kevin Kargel" <kkargel at polartel.com> wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
>> While I wholeheartedly believe we should support transfers for reason of
>> merger/acquisition it still holds that returned addresses need to be made
>> available to the community and not pirated peer2peer for profit.
>>
>> If there were to be an IP market then ARIN should be the monopolistic
>> broker.  Of course that is not possible while maintaining not-for-profit
>> status.
> 
> Assuming that people agree to return space to ARIN without the encouragement
> of a chunk of cash that a transfer market might bring, how should ARIN
> decide which requests to grant and which to deny when there are more
> requests than space available? The options I see (in no particular order)
> are:

IP addresses aren't the property of the holder, thus they should not be
able to sell or profit from the exchange of something that doesn't
belong to them in the first place.


> - Best fit, i.e. prefixes aren't cut up to fill more requests
> - Worthiness contest, e.g. one kind of service judged more important than
> another 
> - First come first served
> - Widest distribution, i.e. get address space to as many networks as
> possible at the cost of deaggregation
> 
> Maybe there are other options, too.  What is your alternative to the
> proposal for a transfer policy?
> 

How much space they already have? With all due respect to the large orgs
on this list, I'm not apt to shed a tear when you can't get another /8
to add to the collection when I just need to add a /22 or /21. For a
small org not getting that space (and unable to afford it from hoarders)
could be a death blow.

~Seth