[arin-ppml] [arin-announce] Policy Proposal: Transfer listingservice

[Tom Vest]

On Jun 12, 2009, at 12:28 PM, Kevin Kargel wrote:

>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml- 
>> bounces at arin.net] On
>> Behalf Of Scott Leibrand
>> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 11:09 AM
>> To: <michael.dillon at bt.com>
>> Cc: <arin-ppml at arin.net>
>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] [arin-announce] Policy Proposal: Transfer
>> listingservice
>>
>> That might work too, but ARIN counsel, the AC, and others involved
>> thought it belonged in the 2008-2 transfer policy, and the CEO has
>> said they don't plan to do a listing service without policy directing
>> them to do so.
>>
>> What do you think of the idea itself?
>>
>> -Scott
>>
>
> I probably should have mentioned that it is a nifty idea if it was  
> just us
> NetOps working with each other and the lawyers and governments would  
> keep
> out of it.  I just don't see much hope that the litigators and  
> regulators
> will keep their fingers out of the pie.

Hi Kevin,

Out of curiosity, do you think that litigators and regulators are more  
likely (or maybe very likely) to keep their fingers out if, after  
enabling the emergence of commercial IPv4 transfers, the RIRs take no  
further actions of any kind related to any IPv4 markets that emerge  
thereafter? Are your views on that probability-of-intervention  
question based on any particular expectation about whether and how  
IPv4 markets will actually work, or are they independent of all such  
expectations (i.e., no matter how things turn out, it would be better  
in all cases for the RIRs to take no position / no action at all)?

TV