[arin-ppml] Alternative to arbitrary transfers

[Ted Mittelstaedt]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Kargel [mailto:kkargel at polartel.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 5:36 AM
> To: Ted Mittelstaedt; ARIN PPML
> Subject: RE: [arin-ppml] Alternative to arbitrary transfers
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ted Mittelstaedt [mailto:tedm at ipinc.net]
> > Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 7:06 PM
> > To: Kevin Kargel; 'ARIN PPML'
> > Subject: RE: [arin-ppml] Alternative to arbitrary transfers
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net
> > > [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Kevin Kargel
> > > Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 4:30 PM
> > > To: ARIN PPML
> > > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Alternative to arbitrary transfers
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Joe Maimon [mailto:jmaimon at chl.com]
> > > > Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 4:18 PM
> > > > To: Ted Mittelstaedt
> > > > Cc: 'Leo Vegoda'; Kevin Kargel; 'ARIN PPML'
> > > > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Alternative to arbitrary transfers
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > I don't see these alternatives in any way as creating 
> a transfer 
> > > > > market - yet I see them as being able to generate 
> reusable IPv4.
> > > > > I would certainly like to have ARIN give them a try and
> > > prove they
> > > > > DON'T work before embarking on a transfer program.
> > > >
> > > > The downside is that ARIN becomes even more the bad guy.
> > > >
> > > > A transfer system could avoid all that.
> > > >
> > > > Doesnt mean I dont personally think all your ideas are
> > > inevitable in
> > > > one shape or another.
> > >
> > > OK, brainstorming more here..
> > >
> > > How about if:
> > >
> > > 1. IP holder "A" decides it wants to relinquish some IP's 
> and would 
> > > like some remuneration..
> > 
> > Right here is the problem.
> > 
> > Holder A has his IP numbers purely due to his requesting 
> the numbers 
> > on the basis of need.  In other words, the numbers were 
> never "his" to 
> > give.  He's "renting" the use of them, just like you would 
> rent a car.  
> > We all would like renumeration for returning our rental cars, but 
> > that's not what we agreed to when we rented the car.
> 
> I don't think this is necessarily the case, especially as it 
> pertains to legacy IP's, where they are not renting the car, 
> but someone gave them the care to use for as long as they 
> wanted free of charge.
> 

By definition, legacy holders never requested IP addresses on
the basis of need.  

Ted