[arin-ppml] Draft Policy2009-1: TransferPolicy (UsingtheEmergencyPDP)

Eliot Lear lear at cisco.com
Fri Mar 27 06:57:42 EDT 2009


I'd like to clarify your clarification.

On 3/26/09 11:04 PM, John Schnizlein wrote:
> Those who have IPv4 addresses when the free pools go empty would bear
> no cost created by a market.  If they convert some subset of their
> hosts from IPv4 to IPv6, they might be able to receive some
> compensation for the effort to release addresses.

Is what you mean, "Those who have IPv4 addresses but have need of no more"?
> Those who do not have IPv4 when the pools run dry would bear both the
> cost of addresses on the unauthorized market plus the cost of the risk
> that those addresses will be unreachable from parts of the Internet -
> or do without.

Is what you mean, "Those who need more IPv4 addresses..."?

This is an important distinction because...
> Who is harmed by this market?

... those who have no need of IPv4 addresses would clearly benefit from 
a value being associated with them.  On the other hand, when we talk 
about harm, this is a more difficult question, because we have to ask, 
"in comparison to what?"


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list