[arin-ppml] "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers (was: Re: And so it ends... )

[John Curran]

On Feb 4, 2011, at 4:37 PM, Benson Schliesser wrote:

> But the situation has changed.  Soon, we will no longer be rationing supply, because the supply is gone.  As a result of IPv4 maturity, and the impending scarcity that entails, I'd suggest RIR policy should be to relax control of the resource.  Allow a market to do what markets do best: efficiently distribute a scarce resource.

There is presently the specified transfer that provides some support for 
a limited market of sorts, without departing from the conservation and 
aggregation goals in the policy framework.

Is this insufficient to provide the incentive for efficient distribution?
If a less restricted, more dynamic market is desirable, then would it 
be one that operated without consideration of the need or aggregation 
requirements (i.e. any size block transfer allowed, and to any party?)
Some of these topics were discussed at length in the formation of the
current specified transfer policy, so it would be good to discuss how
the policy requirements have since changed.

> The benefit of an open address market would be significant.  Hosting companies need IPv4 addresses more than broadband companies; Western countries have more IPv4 addresses than non-Western countries.  And without a market, organizations with excess supply have no incentive to redistribute it.  Markets create the incentive.
> 
> If ARIN relaxes the official position regarding IPv4 management policy, then we can step away from IPv4 and focus on IPv6.

I believe you mean "if the ARIN Community develops such policy"...

FYI,
/John