[arin-ppml] FW: Policy Proposal 2008-6: Emergency TransferPolicyfor IPv4 Addresses - Last Call

[Kevin Kargel]

> Kevin Kargel wrote:
> > It is a shame that so many people take the lazy approach of trying to
> > regulate a problem by artificially raising the cost of the commodity
> without
> > thought as to how that is going to affect the average family.
> Yes. Instead of raising the price of beef when there's a shortage of
> cows, we should keep the price at the same government-set
> family-friendly value, and then have everyone stand in very long lines
> when it arrives at the butcher.

Umm, when there are only four steaks left and 40 people that want them
aren't there going to be lines no matter what the price?  

> 
> I believe this was actually tried, in practice, so there's millions of
> folks you can ask about how it went.
> >
> > Discussions of IPv4 market are probably the biggest thing that is
> keeping
> > holders of unused IP space from allowing it to be reclaimed.  As long as
> > people keep raising the hopes that this hoard will have great future
> value
> > nobody other than a few good socially conscious people are going to
> release
> > the resource.
> >
> >
> >
> Yes. The socially conscious people who also have zero transition cost,
> or who are so socially conscious that they are willing to donate their
> own time and equipment budgets (or those of their employer) to giving
> the addresses to others.

While rare, there are altruistic people and even altruistic companies out
there that are concerned and active about social ethics.  All I can do is
bemoan their rarity and applaud their efforts and sacrifice.

> 
> The much larger group of people who would really like to release address
> space, but who can't get the budget from their CIO aren't going to be
> providing to this cause. Also not releasing their addresses are people
> who have address space now, and are concerned that without a way to
> trade it around they might never be able to get any back at any price,
> so will just hold theirs "just in case."

Yes, and the possibility of a profitable market is what is reinforcing the
"just in case" mentality.  


> 
> And, of course we'll totally ignore the fact that transfers are already
> going on and will continue to go on because there is no way to stop them
> while continuing to allow legitimate business practices like merger and
> acquisition.
> > First come first served till its gone.

Again with the "Everyone else gets to do it Mom!" argument..  You have a
choice, you can do things properly and ethically or not, you don't have to
base your decision on comparative behavior.  

> >
> >
> We know that ARIN has decided to follow that course *now*, we're
> discussing the part that happens *after* "its gone".
> 
> This would be easier if, at runout, all of the already-allocated
> addresses also stopped working entirely. But that's not the case, and so
> transfer (one way or another) will happen, and the only question is "how
> many lawyers do you have to hire?"

Then perhaps we need to revisit the concept of not servicing defunct or
obsolete registrations, with a grace period to renew (with a contract)
before they are reallocated..  That should get some admins to refresh their
data.
I believe there were proposals along these lines in the not too distant
past.

> 
> Matthew Kaufman

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3224 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20090102/745ec3c8/attachment.bin>