[arin-ppml] clarification of Board actions Feb 2 and Mar 18, 2009

[John Schnizlein]

Thank you for the clear and strong statement, about which I have some  
questions.

On 2009Mar31, at 12:03 PM, Kevin Kargel wrote:

> A transfer system will inexorably raise the cost of doing business  
> on the
> internet.

I can see that the cost of deploying more IPv4 would likely rise with  
scarcity.  How would this affect anyone else?

>  However you paint it this is a bad thing for the community and
> for society.

Could it be good for the Internet for the cost of deploying IPv4 to  
increase while the cost of deploying IPv6 remains constant, or  
decreases with experience?  Remember that the goal is to replace IPv4  
with IPv6 to maintain global end-to-end transparency.

> I will continue to oppose P2P transfer policies whenever they
> are presented.
>
> Something I have started to consider, which has it's own set of  
> flaws, would
> perhaps be an ARIN run publically accessible auction for returned IP  
> space
> which would pay the returnee an amount not greater than the  
> registration
> fees they had already given ARIN for that IP block, or in the case  
> of legacy
> space an amount equal to some reasonable multiple of registration  
> fees for
> the block (10?).

Would this constitute a monopoly setting prices for IPv4 address space  
in the region?

What would be the cost of compliance with regulation of a monopoly,  
assuming it were legal?

> An alternative to an auction would be a lottery with the
> winner of the lottery to pay to ARIN the publically stated amount  
> used to
> reimburse the returnee their registration fees plus ARIN handling  
> charges.

This seems to add the complication of gambling to the monopoly  
operation.  What about those locations where gambling is not legal?

> This would be fair to the public, would not foment a runaway  
> commodities
> market, and would offer some small incentive to return IP netblocks.

Is a small incentive enough to induce parties to forego the larger  
incentives potentially available through transfers not authorized by  
ARIN?

>  The lottery concept would avoid ARIN profit taking.  The accepting  
> organization
> would of course have to meet current ARIN criteria for any netblock  
> they
> received.  I have not thought this through enough to be even close  
> to a
> proposal.

Let's think through the implications together.

John