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