[arin-ppml] Will the price per IP really be affected by thetransfer market introduced in 2009-1?

[John Schnizlein]

Some of us think the primary issue is the registration of transfers,  
not the market.  Any market should be separate from the registration  
function.  Phrases that glom these distinct operations together, such  
as "supporting a transfer market", are not helpful, but provocative.

On 2009May14, at 3:01 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> Martin, there is ONLY ONE justification for supporting a transfer  
> market in
> ARIN policy.  That is, to pull UNUSED IPv4 out of storage and have  
> someone
> use it.
>
> It is NOT so that someone can make a pile of money.  That may or may  
> not
> happen, it may or may not have bad side effects.  It is to get the  
> unused
> IPv4 in use.

An advantage of markets for scarce IPv4 address space is that it makes  
tangible and explicit the financial advantage of converting networks  
to IPv6.  Incentives to deploy IPv6 are needed because it has not  
happened and needs to because we really are running out of IPv4  
addresses.  If an operator can convert to IPv6 early enough to get a  
good price for IPv4 addresses, that encourages early adoption because  
once IPv6 is commonplace IPv4 addresses will have no value.

John